What is a False Prophet? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : What is a False Prophet?


Pages : [1] 2

achysklic
07-19-2011, 11:37
Mat 24:23-24 says: "Then if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'There!' do not believe it. For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect."

With this being said with all the different denominations we have today, and most of them have founders whom made many false prophecies.

Should those in those denominations flee, when the false prophet is discovered?

If they stay,what is their fate?

There are 7 test to determine is a prophet is true or false.

Test 1--Do their predictions come true?

an example is:
In 1831 William Miller predicted the end of the world and the return of Jesus Christ in 1844.
His prediction failed.
In essence he was a false prophet.

Test. 2 --- Does the prophet have a divine commission?
example:
Years ago, a T.v. evangelist told the public that God wanted him to build a hospital and if he did not get enough money then God would let him die.

Test 3--- Are the prophecies consistant with scripture?
2 Pet 1:20-21 knowing this first, THAT NO PROPHECY OF SCRIPTURE IS OF ANY PRIVATE INTERPRETATION,
{21} for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit."

Test 4--- Do people benefit spiritually from the prophets ministry?
1 Pet 4:11 "If anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God. If anyone ministers, let him do it as with the ability which God supplies, that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom belong the glory and the dominion forever and ever. Amen."

Test 5---Does what the prophet say or do conflict with Gods 10 commandments?
Deu 13:1-6 "If there arises among you a prophet or a dreamer of dreams, and he gives you a sign or a wonder,
{2} and the sign or the wonder comes to pass, of which he spoke to you, saying, 'Let us go after other gods'; which you have not known; 'and let us serve them,'"
{3} you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, for the LORD your God is TESTING YOU to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul."
{4} You shall walk after the LORD your God and fear Him, and KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS and obey His voice, and you shall serve Him and hold fast to Him."

Test 6---Test the spirits
1 John 4:1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

Test 7---Does the prophet teach the truth?
1Tim.6:3 "If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness,"
{4} he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions,"
{5} useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. FROM SUCH WITHDRAW YOURSELF."

So I ask if you are a member of a denomination that has a founder, or leader who has claimed to have the gift of prophecy put them up against the 7 test. If they fail in any way I suggest you move on fast.

Anyone have any experiences with false prophets?

frank4570
07-19-2011, 12:52
Anyone have any experiences with false prophets?

Yes. There are a whole crapload of people who have experience with false prophet(s).

dbcooper
07-20-2011, 08:28
You can see a host of them here-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76ohvqwsNkk

frank4570
07-20-2011, 08:57
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lvU-DislkI

achysklic
07-20-2011, 09:31
Those videos are awesome...Why are so many people decieved by them?

I just don't get the people who are followers of

Miller, Harold Camping, Armstrong, Ellen White, ect. These people all clearly proved they were false prophets yet Millions cling on to the teachings and the church they led.

Why?
There is alot of good,smart people in these groups whom are abit brainwashed I guess.

frank4570
07-20-2011, 09:34
They *want* or *need* to believe in something. It's just that simple. If they were born someplace else, they would believe something else.


Those videos are awesome...Why are so many people decieved by them?

I just don't get the people who are followers of

Miller, Harold Camping, Armstrong, Ellen White, ect. These people all clearly proved they were false prophets yet Millions cling on to the teachings and the church they led.

Why?
There is alot of good,smart people in these groups whom are abit brainwashed I guess.

dreis454
07-20-2011, 09:36
Google 'the 44th President of the United States'....

creaky
07-20-2011, 09:43
Those videos are awesome...Why are so many people decieved by them?

I just don't get the people who are followers of

Miller, Harold Camping, Armstrong, Ellen White, ect. These people all clearly proved they were false prophets yet Millions cling on to the teachings and the church they led.

Why?
There is alot of good,smart people in these groups whom are abit brainwashed I guess.

Careful there. You're going to be in trouble with your pal Vic.

jtull7
07-20-2011, 10:21
I think that every single tele-evangelist on earth is a false prophet. I hope that every single one of them rots in Hell for an eternity for using religion to lie to and steal from unsophisticated, trusting people.

ArtificialGrape
07-20-2011, 10:28
Those videos are awesome...Why are so many people decieved by them?

I just don't get the people who are followers of

Miller, Harold Camping, Armstrong, Ellen White, ect. These people all clearly proved they were false prophets yet Millions cling on to the teachings and the church they led.

Why?
There is alot of good,smart people in these groups whom are abit brainwashed I guess.
The fact that Benny "I-can-heal-you-by-whacking-you-with-my-suit-jacket" Hinn and the like have millions of followers should literally frighten you.

This is where religious faith is dangerous. People that want something bad enough, and lack critical thinking skills, and require no evidence in support of their core beliefs can be convinced of anything. In the the case of Benny Hinn followers it only has people reaching for their check books, but in other cases they are reaching for the cyanide-laced Flavor Aid, or reaching for explosives to strap on.

FifthFreedom
07-20-2011, 10:30
Just remember AG,
"A corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit, a good tree cannot produce corrupt fruit.,."

Word to the wise is sufficient. ;)

ArtificialGrape
07-20-2011, 10:43
Just remember AG,
"A corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit, a good tree cannot produce corrupt fruit.,."

And sometimes a tree can bear no fruit because it has been cursed by Jesus.

FifthFreedom
07-20-2011, 10:45
And sometimes a tree can bear no fruit because it has been cursed by Jesus.

Yeah which is also a Torah transgression. One is forbidden to destroy a fruit bearing tree. Another sin he seems to get a pass on :upeyes:

Vic Hays
07-20-2011, 11:07
Those videos are awesome...Why are so many people decieved by them?

I just don't get the people who are followers of

Miller, Harold Camping, Armstrong, Ellen White, ect. These people all clearly proved they were false prophets yet Millions cling on to the teachings and the church they led.

Why?
There is alot of good,smart people in these groups whom are abit brainwashed I guess.

Jesus said to beware of false prophets. Jesus did not say to beware of all prophets. True prophets have always been condemned as false prophets.

John 7:45 Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him?
7:46 The officers answered, Never man spake like this man.
7:47 Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived?
7:48 Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him?
7:49 But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed.

Noles26
07-20-2011, 14:13
Is Chris Angel considered a false prophet? His magic is crap IMO.

achysklic
07-20-2011, 15:01
Jesus said to beware of false prophets. Jesus did not say to beware of all prophets. True prophets have always been condemned as false prophets.

John 7:45 Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him?
7:46 The officers answered, Never man spake like this man.
7:47 Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived?
7:48 Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him?
7:49 But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed.

No offence Vic but are trying to say any of those I mentioned were true prophets. If so how do you fiqure?

All I mentioned failed almost all of the 7 tests I posted and the bible states if they fail one they are a false prophet.

Norske
07-20-2011, 16:02
What is a false prophet?

ALL OF THEM.

Each and every one. :steamed:

All through the past, and present.

Organized Religion, each and every one, past and present, is the worlds oldest self-perpetuating con game, and each new generation's "faithful", are the latest "marks". The beneficiaries of the "con" are the clergy within each religion.

The deception will continue to the end of mankind until such time as "God", if he/she/it actually does exist and cares whether we believe he/she/it exists, makes it unmistakably clear that he/she/it actually does exist.

Or, until such time as mankind GROWS UP and admits that NO human, past or present, actually DOES know what happens to the human soul after we each, individually, die and find out individually.

In the meantime, we will continue to hear the claims of new Shamans, each cutting themselves a piece of the pie in the sky (by and by) and conning the marks out of their wealth and support in order to avoid actually having to work for a living. And the gullible "faithful" will continue to provide that support in exchange for a promised "better deal" after death.

:steamed:

Schabesbert
07-20-2011, 16:11
What is a false prophet?

ALL OF THEM.

Each and every one. :steamed:

All through the past, and present.

Organized Religion, each and every one, past and present, is the worlds oldest self-perpetuating con game, and each new generation's "faithful", are the latest "marks". The beneficiaries of the "con" are the clergy within each religion.

The deception will continue to the end of mankind until such time as "God", if he/she/it actually does exist and cares whether we believe he/she/it exists, makes it unmistakably clear that he/she/it actually does exist.

Or, until such time as mankind GROWS UP and admits that NO human, past or present, actually DOES know what happens to the human soul after we each, individually, die and find out individually.

In the meantime, we will continue to hear the claims of new Shamans, each cutting themselves a piece of the pie in the sky (by and by) and conning the marks out of their wealth and support in order to avoid actually having to work for a living. And the gullible "faithful" will continue to provide that support in exchange for a promised "better deal" after death.

:steamed:
Norske,
What happened in your life to make you so angry and bitter?

Do you hate God because of something you think He's done to you "unjustly?"

Vic Hays
07-20-2011, 17:02
No offence Vic but are trying to say any of those I mentioned were true prophets. If so how do you fiqure?

All I mentioned failed almost all of the 7 tests I posted and the bible states if they fail one they are a false prophet.

According to ff Jesus was a false prophet, the tests and reasons he used were very skewed and prejudiced. Why did your list include Ellen White? Have you actually tested her yourself or are you just looking at some hate site? I have found that the accusations against her are baseless. Sometimes it takes some time and thinking to figure out what is going on, but they are baseless just the same.

Were you trolling to see if you could get me involved?

Tilley
07-20-2011, 18:50
And sometimes a tree can bear no fruit because it has been cursed by Jesus.

You and some of the others sure have a good time bashing my Lord Jesus.

1 Corinthians 1:17-19 (NIV)

For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
Christ Crucified Is God’s Power and Wisdom

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

For it is written:

“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”

Written by Abba Father through one of the first Jewish Christians.

achysklic
07-21-2011, 02:47
According to ff Jesus was a false prophet, the tests and reasons he used were very skewed and prejudiced. Why did your list include Ellen White? Have you actually tested her yourself or are you just looking at some hate site? I have found that the accusations against her are baseless. Sometimes it takes some time and thinking to figure out what is going on, but they are baseless just the same.

Were you trolling to see if you could get me involved?

Vic did you bother reading the 7 tests I posted? All the test use scripture!

Yes I have tested Ellen White and found alot of her predictions to be way off according to the 7 tests I listed. I am sorry you are in denial of this. Calling me a troll is unbecomming of you.

If you noticed I also mentioned Armstrong in the list, I have been accused many times being associated with him. Does that make me a troll to myself?

Actually when I was very young I studied some of his stuff, as soon as I realize his prophecies failed to come true I ran. Vic you seem like a smart guy. I wonder if you really read Ellen Whites failed prophecies with a open mind. If you had I would think you would have ran away as well.

Sorry you seem to think this was directed at you, People seem to get paranoid for reasons.

Also do me a favor it seems I have to repeat almost everything over and over, I think you exspect people to read all your posted (Which I actually d0) but then skim throught others post. This is very obvious...Just my rant sorry.

FifthFreedom
07-21-2011, 07:00
According to ff Jesus was a false prophet, the tests and reasons he used were very skewed and prejudiced.


Not skewed at all. The reasons are based on Torah which is not "skewed and prejudice" Only you don't like the answer so you choose to call it so. Or that we Jews don't understand our own books and some Gentiles who neither understand them nor can read them can come along 1800 years later to tell us where "we got it wrong" :upeyes:

FifthFreedom
07-21-2011, 07:06
You and some of the others sure have a good time bashing my Lord Jesus.

1 Corinthians 1:17-19 (NIV)

For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
Christ Crucified Is God’s Power and Wisdom

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

For it is written:

“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”

Written by Abba Father through one of the first Jewish Christians.

He's not bashing, merely pointing out that jsus killed a fruit bearing tree for no good reason, and I added that doing so was a violation of Torah. Sometimes truth hurts.


For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence

well, that I agree with.



For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God

Ahh yes, the old "Emperor"s new clothes" tactic.

Vic Hays
07-21-2011, 07:43
Vic did you bother reading the 7 tests I posted? All the test use scripture!

Yes I have tested Ellen White and found alot of her predictions to be way off according to the 7 tests I listed. I am sorry you are in denial of this. Calling me a troll is unbecomming of you.

If you noticed I also mentioned Armstrong in the list, I have been accused many times being associated with him. Does that make me a troll to myself?

Actually when I was very young I studied some of his stuff, as soon as I realize his prophecies failed to come true I ran. Vic you seem like a smart guy. I wonder if you really read Ellen Whites failed prophecies with a open mind. If you had I would think you would have ran away as well.

Sorry you seem to think this was directed at you, People seem to get paranoid for reasons.

Also do me a favor it seems I have to repeat almost everything over and over, I think you exspect people to read all your posted (Which I actually d0) but then skim throught others post. This is very obvious...Just my rant sorry.

FF posted right after you. His post is practically a mirror of yours. Your 7 tests are based on your opinion right? FF is basing his opinions on scripture right? I wouldn't want either of you two on a jury. You are much to opinionated to be fair. I am an opinionated person also. I have had to learn to at least understand the other person's point of view and I have been wrong enough times to know that I am not always correct. Repeating things does not make your opinion any more correct. Jesus wants us to learn basic justice. In fact, somehow the way we judge will be used to judge each of us.

Matthew 7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

achysklic
07-21-2011, 09:16
FF posted right after you. His post is practically a mirror of yours. Your 7 tests are based on your opinion right? FF is basing his opinions on scripture right? I wouldn't want either of you two on a jury. You are much to opinionated to be fair. I am an opinionated person also. I have had to learn to at least understand the other person's point of view and I have been wrong enough times to know that I am not always correct. Repeating things does not make your opinion any more correct. Jesus wants us to learn basic justice. In fact, somehow the way we judge will be used to judge each of us.

Matthew 7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

Vic honestly this is getting old, atleast FF and Bert read what I post whether they agree or not!

You obviously don't read hardly anything. The 7 test I posted I said several time were based on scripture. Then you say I base them on my opinion.

Please go read the 7 test I posted I used scripture after each test...If you keep making me repeat every little detail we will never get anywhere with this. I am comming to the conclusion you are abit closeminded and Hence not open to reading what others post only wanting to toot your own horn.

achysklic
07-21-2011, 09:26
Ok let's examine your prophetesses:

Mrs. White claimed she was shown in vision that some of those present at the 1856 conference would be translated:
I was shown the company present at the Conference. Said the angel: "Some food for worms, some subjects of the seven last plagues, some will be alive and remain upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus." Testimonies, Vol. 1, p. 131

Mrs. White was given a vision showing the fate of those people attending the conference. She specifically states that some of them will suffer the seven last plagues, and some will be alive when Jesus returns. The Whites had such confidence in this "vision" that it was published in Mrs. White's Testimonies to the Church and received widespread distribution. However, by the early 1900s all those who attended the conference had passed away, leaving the Church with the dilemma of trying to figure out how to explain away such a prominent prophetic failure.

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. Deut. 18:22



On June 27, 1850, Mrs. White wrote that only a few months remained for the people to get ready:

"My accompanying angel said, 'Time is almost finished. Get ready, get ready, get ready.' . . . now time is almost finished. . . and what we have been years learning, they will have to learn in a few months." (Early Writings, pp. 64-67).

Vic, This isn't going ti turn into a Ellen White bashing, I could go on and on all day long showing her false prdictions and how they line up with scripture.

Point is open you eyes, don't be paranoid and do as the Bible says

1John3:4 Prove all things, hold fast to that which is good.
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)

Vic Hays
07-21-2011, 18:26
Ok let's examine your prophetesses:

Mrs. White claimed she was shown in vision that some of those present at the 1856 conference would be translated:
I was shown the company present at the Conference. Said the angel: "Some food for worms, some subjects of the seven last plagues, some will be alive and remain upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus." Testimonies, Vol. 1, p. 131

Mrs. White was given a vision showing the fate of those people attending the conference. She specifically states that some of them will suffer the seven last plagues, and some will be alive when Jesus returns. The Whites had such confidence in this "vision" that it was published in Mrs. White's Testimonies to the Church and received widespread distribution. However, by the early 1900s all those who attended the conference had passed away, leaving the Church with the dilemma of trying to figure out how to explain away such a prominent prophetic failure.

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. Deut. 18:22



On June 27, 1850, Mrs. White wrote that only a few months remained for the people to get ready:

"My accompanying angel said, 'Time is almost finished. Get ready, get ready, get ready.' . . . now time is almost finished. . . and what we have been years learning, they will have to learn in a few months." (Early Writings, pp. 64-67).

Vic, This isn't going ti turn into a Ellen White bashing, I could go on and on all day long showing her false prdictions and how they line up with scripture.

Point is open you eyes, don't be paranoid and do as the Bible says

1John3:4 Prove all things, hold fast to that which is good.
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)

Ellen wrote thousands of pages of stuff. If you are going to condemn her for this then you will have to condemn Jonah. Prophecy is conditional. Nineveh was not overthrown in forty days.

Jonah 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

Jonah 4:2 And he prayed unto the LORD, and said, I pray thee, O LORD, [was] not this my saying, when I was yet in my country? Therefore I fled before unto Tarshish: for I knew that thou [art] a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repentest thee of the evil.

achysklic
07-22-2011, 04:23
Ellen wrote thousands of pages of stuff. If you are going to condemn her for this then you will have to condemn Jonah. Prophecy is conditional. Nineveh was not overthrown in forty days.

Jonah 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

Jonah 4:2 And he prayed unto the LORD, and said, I pray thee, O LORD, [was] not this my saying, when I was yet in my country? Therefore I fled before unto Tarshish: for I knew that thou [art] a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repentest thee of the evil.

Vic, I don't condemn Mrs.White.God Does! His word says if a prophet fails just once they are a false prophet.

"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"
(Deuteronomy 18:22).

But Mrs. White didn't fail just once, she had dozens of failed prophecies.

"During the year 1845 I met Miss Ellen G. Harmon several times at my uncle's house in South Windham, Me. The first of these meetings was in the month of May, when I heard her declare that God had revealed to her that Jesus Christ would return to this earth in June, the next month." (Lucinda Burdick, notarized letter (http://www.ex-sda.com/lucinda.htm), published in Limboline)

When this didn't happen she tried again.

"During the haying season I again met her in company with James White at the same place, and heard my uncle ask her about the failure of the Lord to appear in June according to her visions. She replied that she had been told in the language of Canaan which she did not understand; but that she had since come to understand that Christ would return in September, at the second growth of grass instead of the first." (Ibid.)

When that didn't happen she stated again in 1850

"My accompanying angel said, 'Time is almost finished. Get ready, get ready, get ready.' . . . now time is almost finished. . . and what we have been years learning, they will have to learn in a few months." (Early Writings, pp. 64-67)

Did her prophecy of "colored people" come true? Ummm No!

"Slavery will again be revived in the Southern States; for the spirit of slavery still lives. Therefore it will not do for those who labor among the colored people to preach the truth as boldly and openly as they would be free to do in other places. Even Christ clothed His lessons in figures and parables to avoid the opposition of the Pharisees." (Spalding & Magan Collection, page 21 and 2 MR #153, page 300)


One of my favorite of her is that TALL people live on Jupiter.

"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.'" (Taken from Mrs. Truesdail's letter, Jan 27, 1891)

achysklic
07-22-2011, 04:32
Now let's see how she compairs to the Bible.

Ellen white:Satan, who is the father of lies, deceived Adam in a similar way, telling him that he need not obey God, that he would not die if he transgressed the law. Evangelism, p. 598

Bible:And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 1 Timothy 2:14

Ellen White:"God loves honest-hearted, truthful children, but cannot love those who are dishonest. . . . The Lord loves those little children who try to do right, and he has promised that they shall be in his kingdom. But wicked children God does not love. . . . When you feel tempted to speak impatient and fretful, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong." (An Appeal to the Youth, pp. 42, 61, 62)

Bible:"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." (Rom. 5:8)
"Love your enemies" (Luke 6:27).

Ellen White:"The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty" (Letter 32, 1899, quoted in the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. 1129).

Bible:"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace" (Isaiah 9:6).


Vic, this can go on and on she failed so many times.

Bottom line it's your choice if you want to remain deceived. Again it's not me condemning her. God is!

Vic Hays
07-22-2011, 14:01
Vic, I don't condemn Mrs.White.God Does! His word says if a prophet fails just once they are a false prophet.

One of my favorite of her is that TALL people live on Jupiter.

"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.'" (Taken from Mrs. Truesdail's letter, Jan 27, 1891)


[/INDENT][/INDENT]

Since its one of your favorites I can tell you this is false. Ellen White never said the planet she saw in vision was Jupiter.

You really need to watch out for hearsay. You may one day be on trial for your faith and have a bunch of false witnesses and twisted words used against yourself. It would be a shame for you to be judged as you yourself have judged.

Research her writings and find the account of the vision of the planet. You will find that one of the people who had lost faith and was an astronomer is the one that decided the planet she saw in vision was Jupiter.

Vic Hays
07-22-2011, 14:09
Now let's see how she compairs to the Bible.

Ellen white:Satan, who is the father of lies, deceived Adam in a similar way, telling him that he need not obey God, that he would not die if he transgressed the law. Evangelism, p. 598

Bible:And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 1 Timothy 2:14

Ellen White:"God loves honest-hearted, truthful children, but cannot love those who are dishonest. . . . The Lord loves those little children who try to do right, and he has promised that they shall be in his kingdom. But wicked children God does not love. . . . When you feel tempted to speak impatient and fretful, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong." (An Appeal to the Youth, pp. 42, 61, 62)

Bible:"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." (Rom. 5:8)
"Love your enemies" (Luke 6:27).

Ellen White:"The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty" (Letter 32, 1899, quoted in the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. 1129).

Bible:"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace" (Isaiah 9:6).


Vic, this can go on and on she failed so many times.

Bottom line it's your choice if you want to remain deceived. Again it's not me condemning her. God is!

Bottom line is that you are so judgmental you are picking at every little thing.

1. Are you saying that Adam did not sin?

2. The words love and hate can have different shades of meaning.
Romans 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

3. Lord God Almighty and Mighty God are not the same.

Isaiah 29:20 For the terrible one is brought to nought, and the scorner is consumed, and all that watch for iniquity are cut off:
29:21 That make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, and turn aside the just for a thing of nought.

achysklic
07-22-2011, 15:56
Vic, it's obvious Gods word doesn't fit into you deception. You ignore this verse completely.

"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"
(Deuteronomy 18:22).

Honestly though believe how you feel is right, Ellen White along with many others were accounding to scripture FAlse Prophets.

If you cannot change when presented the facts now, would you change if God was here and said she was a false prophet? I wonder.

But that is between you and God.

BTW AS a direct quote from Mrs. White does say Jupiter and Saturn.

"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.'" (Taken from Mrs. Truesdail's letter, Jan 27, 1891)

Here's a few facts about those planets as well.


These planets have no solid surface like the earth. The surfaces consist entirely of a sea of liquid hydrogen, hundreds of miles deep.
The atmospheric pressure is millions of times greater than the earth's. The pressure is enough to crush the strongest metals.
Numerous space probes have examined these planets using advanced technology and have not detected any sign of life whatsoever. No plants. No animals. No tall people. Nothing but hydrogen, helium and other gases.
Also why do you keep comparing Ellen White with poople in the Bible such as Adam? Strange indeed

BTW I never knew Adam to claim to be a prophet...Mrs. White did.

Peace brother :)

Vic Hays
07-22-2011, 19:32
BTW AS a direct quote from Mrs. White does say Jupiter and Saturn.

"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.'" (Taken from Mrs. Truesdail's letter, Jan 27, 1891)

Peace brother :)

You don't know the difference between a direct quote and a third parties interpretation. Look at where the quote marks are and who wrote this letter. You need to stay away from the hate sites and look at what Ellen White actually wrote.


http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/faq-mist.html
"Inhabited Planets in our Solar System. Contrary to some reports, Ellen White did not identify by name any of the "worlds" that she was shown in vision. Joseph Bates, a retired sea captain with a special interest in astronomy, was present during at least one of these visions, and he is reported to have identified the planets Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus as being among those described. Some have mistakenly linked Elder Bates' remarks to Ellen White's description of a "place" inhabited by "noble" and "majestic" beings. In Ellen White's own account of her vision, however, she says only that she was taken to "A PLACE" that was bright and glorious" (emphasis supplied). She does not identify "the place" as Jupiter, Saturn, or any other planet in our solar system. Here is her description: "The Lord has given me a view of other worlds. Wings were given me, and an angel attended me from the city to a place that was bright and glorious. The grass of the place was living green, and the birds there warbled a sweet song. The inhabitants of the place were of all sizes; they were noble, majestic, and lovely. They bore the express image of Jesus, and their countenances beamed with holy joy, expressive of the freedom and happiness of the place." Early Writings, pp. 39, 40. "

Paul7
07-23-2011, 08:04
I'm much more concerned with the government forcibly taking half of people's income through taxation than people donating to causes they believe in. Kind of like someone buying a gun I don't like, it's none of my business.

achysklic
07-23-2011, 08:13
You don't know the difference between a direct quote and a third parties interpretation. Look at where the quote marks are and who wrote this letter. You need to stay away from the hate sites and look at what Ellen White actually wrote.


http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/faq-mist.html
"Inhabited Planets in our Solar System. Contrary to some reports, Ellen White did not identify by name any of the "worlds" that she was shown in vision. Joseph Bates, a retired sea captain with a special interest in astronomy, was present during at least one of these visions, and he is reported to have identified the planets Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus as being among those described. Some have mistakenly linked Elder Bates' remarks to Ellen White's description of a "place" inhabited by "noble" and "majestic" beings. In Ellen White's own account of her vision, however, she says only that she was taken to "A PLACE" that was bright and glorious" (emphasis supplied). She does not identify "the place" as Jupiter, Saturn, or any other planet in our solar system. Here is her description: "The Lord has given me a view of other worlds. Wings were given me, and an angel attended me from the city to a place that was bright and glorious. The grass of the place was living green, and the birds there warbled a sweet song. The inhabitants of the place were of all sizes; they were noble, majestic, and lovely. They bore the express image of Jesus, and their countenances beamed with holy joy, expressive of the freedom and happiness of the place." Early Writings, pp. 39, 40. "


Vic, Don't take this wrong but I wonder why you defend a woman who has made many false prophecies? This is where most people go wrong they get comfortable with their churches and lose sight of Gods church.

It disturbs me that all the material I posted that clearly proves her false prophecies and there are many more, and all you can come back with is that she didn't mention Jupiter. Who cares? the prophecy was still wrong.

The bible is clear if a person is wrong just 1 time to flee from them.

So I ask are you willing to listen to Gods word on this and flee from your comfortable church and seek the truth. or ignore God and make excuses for a false prophet?

God expects us to seek Him in spirit and truth. She has proven alot of untruth.

This is not a Vic, bashing session it is a false prophet bashing.

We need to seek God in love.

Vic Hays
07-23-2011, 22:27
It disturbs me that all the material I posted that clearly proves her false prophecies and there are many more, and all you can come back with is that she didn't mention Jupiter. Who cares? the prophecy was still wrong.


In your very misinformed opinion.

achysklic
07-24-2011, 06:31
In your very misinformed opinion.

Vic, I see now that you are rooted in adventism. I know it's hard to change what you feel comfortable with, but if it goes against God you have to make a choice.

I do have a question, I was reading your bio basically and you stated that the members of your church were angels.

"It was no question which Church I would want to join. The one with all the angels right? Well, they weren't all angels"

Was this a joke?
Did I mis-read it?

I hope I misunderstood it, because the bible is clear Humans are not and will never be angels.

Vic Hays
07-24-2011, 08:09
Vic, I see now that you are rooted in adventism. I know it's hard to change what you feel comfortable with, but if it goes against God you have to make a choice.



You posted a bunch of slanderous junk. I showed you that what you were posting was not a "direct quote" as you put it.

You appear to be one of those type of people that cannot admit to being wrong. Where is the Truth in that? You should be apologizing instead of attacking.

I make mistakes at times and I try to learn from them. I have a wonderful God who has shown me tremendous love and forgiveness. I am not about to abandon Him.

achysklic
07-24-2011, 08:47
You posted a bunch of slanderous junk. I showed you that what you were posting was not a "direct quote" as you put it.

You appear to be one of those type of people that cannot admit to being wrong. Where is the Truth in that? You should be apologizing instead of attacking.

I make mistakes at times and I try to learn from them. I have a wonderful God who has shown me tremendous love and forgiveness. I am not about to abandon Him.

Vic, I am beginning to think you are abit delusional. The slanderous junk I posted were all from proven sources. Hence why I encluded the source and pg. numbers. The only thing you shown was that Mrs. White didn't use the term Jupiter!

What about all the other things I posted that are directly against the Bible?
I even give the Biblical comparisons... I'll repost it since you ignore it the first time.

Ellen white:Satan, who is the father of lies, deceived Adam in a similar way, telling him that he need not obey God, that he would not die if he transgressed the law. Evangelism, p. 598

Bible:And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 1 Timothy 2:14

Ellen White:"God loves honest-hearted, truthful children, but cannot love those who are dishonest. . . . The Lord loves those little children who try to do right, and he has promised that they shall be in his kingdom. But wicked children God does not love. . . . When you feel tempted to speak impatient and fretful, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong." (An Appeal to the Youth, pp. 42, 61, 62)

Bible:"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." (Rom. 5:8)
"Love your enemies" (Luke 6:27).

Ellen White:"The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty" (Letter 32, 1899, quoted in the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. 1129).

Bible:"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace" (Isaiah 9:6).


I will not apologize for a false prophet. If you want to stay in your adventist bubble that's your choice, however Gods Church is not a denomination.

Also thanks for answering the question whether or not you view adventist as angels!

It seems all you ever do in every response you give to everyone is post directly from adventist tracts.

I will continue to pray that God removes the veil from your eyes.

FifthFreedom
07-24-2011, 09:48
So achysklic,
who would you say in your opinion is a "true prophet" today?

achysklic
07-24-2011, 09:56
So achysklic,
who would you say in your opinion is a "true prophet" today?

Honestly i dont know if there are any . Thete had only been about a dozen ever recorded. not as common as most think

FifthFreedom
07-24-2011, 09:59
Honestly i dont know if there are any


That's because there aren't any more.

Vic Hays
07-24-2011, 11:23
[QUOTE=achysklic;17674832]Vic, I am beginning to think you are abit delusional. The slanderous junk I posted were all from proven sources. Hence why I encluded the source and pg. numbers. The only thing you shown was that Mrs. White didn't use the term Jupiter!
QUOTE]

That just shows how much bias you have that you are willing to use any source to uphold your opinion.

You said the Jupiter thing was one of your favorites and you included the science as to why Jupiter cannot support life as we know it.

Who is delusional here? You are still justifying yourself.

Vic Hays
07-24-2011, 11:27
That's because there aren't any more.

God still speaks through His prophets.

Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.

Amos 3:7 Surely the Lord God does nothing, Unless He reveals His secret to His servants the prophets.

Acts 7:52 Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who foretold the coming of the Just One, of whom you now have become the betrayers and murderers.

FifthFreedom
07-24-2011, 11:29
God still speaks through His prophets.

Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.

Um, this may be a bit of a shock to you...but that hasn't happened yet

achysklic
07-24-2011, 11:34
Um, this may be a bit of a shock to you...but that hasn't happened yet

I am in shock I agree with FF........:)

FifthFreedom
07-24-2011, 11:35
I am in shock I agree with FF........:)

Uh OH!

LOL
hey bound to happen once in awhile:wavey:

achysklic
07-24-2011, 11:38
[QUOTE=achysklic;17674832]Vic, I am beginning to think you are abit delusional. The slanderous junk I posted were all from proven sources. Hence why I encluded the source and pg. numbers. The only thing you shown was that Mrs. White didn't use the term Jupiter!
QUOTE]

That just shows how much bias you have that you are willing to use any source to uphold your opinion.

You said the Jupiter thing was one of your favorites and you included the science as to why Jupiter cannot support life as we know it.

Who is delusional here? You are still justifying yourself.


Vic, it was one of my FAVS. because it was still a failed prophecy, not because she used the word Jupiter. You really are grasping at straws.

BTW VIC, 3rd times a charm, could you please answer my question I asked 3 times now.

Do you believe adventist are angels? or any Human is a angel?

Your answer could prove your state of mind. Since you avoid 98% of what is asked or presented to you,and hold tight to the teachings of a false prophet whom has been proven wrong by the Bible.

Snapper2
07-24-2011, 11:57
How many and who were to judge false prophets? Were the whole "congregation" accountable for a prophecy? It seems God Himself judged Balaam.:dunno:

achysklic
07-24-2011, 12:05
That's because there aren't any more.

I know you don't agree with the NT, but Even the NT teaches there are no prophets right now because we have the son.

Hebrews 1:1 and 2, "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son..."

Snapper2
07-24-2011, 12:20
I know you don't agree with the NT, but Even the NT teaches there are no prophets right now because we have the son.

Hebrews 1:1 and 2, "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son..."

You seem to contradict yourself here. You say the NT has no prophets and then you declare the Son one. Does this mean you think the Son is dead along with the rest of the OT prophets or has He just quit prophesying?

Vic Hays
07-24-2011, 13:15
[QUOTE=Vic Hays;17675481]


Vic, it was one of my FAVS. because it was still a failed prophecy, not because she used the word Jupiter. You really are grasping at straws.

BTW VIC, 3rd times a charm, could you please answer my question I asked 3 times now.

Do you believe adventist are angels? or any Human is a angel?

Your answer could prove your state of mind. Since you avoid 98% of what is asked or presented to you,and hold tight to the teachings of a false prophet whom has been proven wrong by the Bible.

Why are you trying to "prove my state of mind"? If I was you I would be ashamed at being found to be so ignorant of spiritual things.

One thing is obvious and that is that as well as your poor judgement you also do not know scripture very well.

I will answer your question about angels.

Angel means messenger. I do believe that people can be messengers for God. Maybe you disagree, but you are entitled to your opinion.

The New Testament speaks of prophets even though you didn't read it or don't believe in it. I will give you a few texts to see if you agree. The New Testament is so full of texts relating to prophets that I won't post them all here.

I Timothy 4:14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.

I Corinthians 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
12:8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
12:9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
12:10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another [divers] kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
12:11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

Revelation 1:3 Blessed [is] he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time [is] at hand.

Revelation 19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See [thou do it] not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Acts 13:1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.

Acts 11:27 And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch.
11:28 And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.

achysklic
07-24-2011, 14:06
You seem to contradict yourself here. You say the NT has no prophets and then you declare the Son one. Does this mean you think the Son is dead along with the rest of the OT prophets or has He just quit prophesying?

Sorry it came out wrong, what I meant to say is modern day has no prophets since the son. Once the Book of Rev. was finished we won't have a prophet again until right before Jesus returns.

achysklic
07-24-2011, 14:08
[QUOTE=achysklic;17675548]

Why are you trying to "prove my state of mind"? If I was you I would be ashamed at being found to be so ignorant of spiritual things.

One thing is obvious and that is that as well as your poor judgement you also do not know scripture very well.

I will answer your question about angels.

Angel means messenger. I do believe that people can be messengers for God. Maybe you disagree, but you are entitled to your opinion.

The New Testament speaks of prophets even though you didn't read it or don't believe in it. I will give you a few texts to see if you agree. The New Testament is so full of texts relating to prophets that I won't post them all here.

I Timothy 4:14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.

I Corinthians 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
12:8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
12:9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
12:10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another [divers] kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
12:11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

Revelation 1:3 Blessed [is] he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time [is] at hand.

Revelation 19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See [thou do it] not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Acts 13:1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.

Acts 11:27 And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch.
11:28 And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.


Thanks Vic your whole rant here was pointless, I mistyped above, I do believe there were prophets in the NT, just not Now.

Since you believe there are prophets now prove how much you know about scripture....hmmmmmmmmm

also the bible is clear man was made lower than the angels. You really nee to get out of adventism.

After we are changed to our new spirit body, Gods elect will be alittle higher than the angels, we will judge them.1 Corinthians 6:3

Angels are messengers of God, but unlike humans, angels are not made in the image of God

Vic Hays
07-24-2011, 15:58
[QUOTE=Vic Hays;17675922]

Thanks Vic your whole rant here was pointless, I mistyped above, I do believe there were prophets in the NT, just not Now.

Since you believe there are prophets now prove how much you know about scripture....hmmmmmmmmm


Angels are messengers of God, but unlike humans, angels are not made in the image of God

1. How do you support not having prophets from the Bible?

2. I don't need to prove anything about myself. If you had bothered to read my post you would have come across a couple of texts that prove your position false. How about I Corinthians 12:10?

3. A person can be a messenger of God, so why not call them an angel? Jesus himself was the chief angel in that regard. The Archangel.

I Thessalonians 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

I'm sorry that the Truth does not agree with your very strongly held opinions.
:upeyes:

achysklic
07-24-2011, 16:23
[QUOTE=achysklic;17676149]

1. How do you support not having prophets from the Bible?

2. I don't need to prove anything about myself. If you had bothered to read my post you would have come across a couple of texts that prove your position false. How about I Corinthians 12:10?

3. A person can be a messenger of God, so why not call them an angel? Jesus himself was the chief angel in that regard. The Archangel.

I Thessalonians 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

I'm sorry that the Truth does not agree with your very strongly held opinions.
:upeyes:


Vic, there were prophets in the NT, do I think there are prophets today, NO!

Vic. God speaks to us through His son now, not prophets.

Hebrews 1:1 and 2, "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son..."

Vic, I already addressed 1Thess.4 To say Jesus is the arch angel there is to say Jesus is the trump.. Get realistic

"why not call them angels" Name one verse God ever calls a human a angel. and you put yourself in Gods place and call humans angels?

How dare you!

Vic Hays
07-24-2011, 17:19
[QUOTE=Vic Hays;17676658]


Vic, there were prophets in the NT, do I think there are prophets today, NO!

Vic. God speaks to us through His son now, not prophets.

Hebrews 1:1 and 2, "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son..."

Vic, I already addressed 1Thess.4 To say Jesus is the arch angel there is to say Jesus is the trump.. Get realistic



1. Like I said, you are not able to back up what you "think" with scripture. There are plenty of scriptures that talk about prophets.

2. Jesus told us how He would speak to us through the Holy Spirit. The scripture also talks about prophets. This is another one of your "I think". Perhaps you are having trouble with this because you don't believe that the Holy Spirit is capable of communicating.

3. I Thessalonians 4 says that Jesus shouts with the voice of the Archangel and has the trumpet of God, not that he is the trumpet or the voice. Try working on your reading comprehension.

4. Perhaps there are people who are called angels. The Church has been given the privilege to teach the gospel to every nation, kindred and tongue, the whole world. In representative language this is represented by an angel flying around the world with the Gospel. Matthew 28:18-20

Revelation 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
14:7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.

achysklic
07-25-2011, 03:08
Vic, you seem to think the word for angel is the same word for messanger. It isn't!

Jesus was not the arch angel Michael, this is yet another false Ellen White teaching that the bible disproves but you cannot accept Gods word.

Jude 1:9 "Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee."

This verse clearly shows Michael is not Jesus.

To say he is, is to deny Christ!

Jesus Christ came to this earth as God-man; not God-angel-man.

Vic let me ask you a question and answer this honestly.

We know the Bible is clear is a person fails just once on prophecy they are considered a false prophet.

So here's the question:

Do you think ALL of Ellen White's predictions came true?

Please don't avoid this question Vic. If so it just shows the cover up that adventists have been doing since the 1840"s

Vic Hays
07-25-2011, 08:55
Vic, you seem to think the word for angel is the same word for messanger. It isn't!

Jesus was not the arch angel Michael, this is yet another false Ellen White teaching that the bible disproves but you cannot accept Gods word.

Jude 1:9 "Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee."

This verse clearly shows Michael is not Jesus.

To say he is, is to deny Christ!

Jesus Christ came to this earth as God-man; not God-angel-man.

Vic let me ask you a question and answer this honestly.

We know the Bible is clear is a person fails just once on prophecy they are considered a false prophet.

So here's the question:

Do you think ALL of Ellen White's predictions came true?

Please don't avoid this question Vic. If so it just shows the cover up that adventists have been doing since the 1840"s



What I expound as Bible Truth is what I have found in the Bible. I don't think I have ever read that Michael is one of Jesus other names in Ellen Whites writings. If you think that Jesus shouts with the voice of someone else at the resurrection because you are so stubborn and rigid in your thinking then there is not much I can do about it. I doubt that it is a salvation issue. However, it appears that this is a tendency of yours to form false opinions, based on misunderstood scripture and this is leading you away from Lord instead of closer.

The Holy Spirit is the one who will lead you into Truth. Confess your sins and ask for Him to come into your life.

As far as unfulfilled prophecy the Bible is full of it from a human perspective. God has His way of fulfilling prophecy in ways that we don't expect. The Jews like FF are always harping on how Jesus could not possibly be the Messiah because of this or that. They are nitpicking because they do not want to believe. This is what you are doing. You can find all kinds of ways to doubt if you so desire. This will only bring you to ruin. Salvation is in Jesus Christ alone, His Word in the Bible. I do not trust anyone, not you, not E G White or anyone else to lead me to the heavenly shores. Ellen Whites claim is that her writings only lead to the Bible. They certainly do.

achysklic
07-25-2011, 10:57
What I expound as Bible Truth is what I have found in the Bible. I don't think I have ever read that Michael is one of Jesus other names in Ellen Whites writings. If you think that Jesus shouts with the voice of someone else at the resurrection because you are so stubborn and rigid in your thinking then there is not much I can do about it. I doubt that it is a salvation issue. However, it appears that this is a tendency of yours to form false opinions, based on misunderstood scripture and this is leading you away from Lord instead of closer.

The Holy Spirit is the one who will lead you into Truth. Confess your sins and ask for Him to come into your life.

As far as unfulfilled prophecy the Bible is full of it from a human perspective. God has His way of fulfilling prophecy in ways that we don't expect. The Jews like FF are always harping on how Jesus could not possibly be the Messiah because of this or that. They are nitpicking because they do not want to believe. This is what you are doing. You can find all kinds of ways to doubt if you so desire. This will only bring you to ruin. Salvation is in Jesus Christ alone, His Word in the Bible. I do not trust anyone, not you, not E G White or anyone else to lead me to the heavenly shores. Ellen Whites claim is that her writings only lead to the Bible. They certainly do.

Vic, Let's examine 1 thess.4:16.
Because the Lord Himself shall descend
from heaven with a shout of command,
with the voice of an archangel and
with the trumpet of God; and the dead in
Christ shall rise first;

You say base your who believe on the nature of Jesus on this 1 verse.
You say Jesus is the arch angel doing the shouting,

Let's look at it for what it really is saying.

First it says Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout of command.

Ok the next part tells us who is doing the shouting
with the voice of a arch angel.

This does not say Jesus is doing the shouting, it is clear at His comming the angels will be shouting and sounding the trump!

They will accompany Christ at His return (Matthew 16:27).

Let's please look at the origins of angels

1. They were created (Psalm 148:1-5; Nehemiah 9:6).
2. They were created before the earth was created (Job 38:4-7).
3. They are a part of God’s family in heaven (Ephesians 3:15).

Let's look at the nature of angels
1. They are a higher order than man, but lower than God (Psalm 8:5; Heb. 2:7).
2. They have super-human knowledge, but are not omniscient (Mark 13:32;
1 Peter 1:10-12; Matthew 24:36).
3. They have super-human strength, but are not omnipotent (Ps. 103:20; 2 Samuel
24:15-17).
4. They have super-human speed, but are not omnipresent (Daniel 9:20-23).
5. They are innumerable (Hebrews 12:22; Revelation 5:11).
6. They are without marriage (Matthew 22:30).
7. They have a special interest in our salvation (Luke 2:13-14; 15:10;1 Pet. 1:10-12).
8. The form of angels vary, taking whatever form God desires for them (Exodus 3:2;
Hebrews 1:7; Genesis 18:1-2; 2 Kings 6:15-17).
9. There is rank among angels (arch-angel, cherubim, seraphim).


You make a claim Ellen Whites writings only lead to the Bible, But the Bible is clear the satan can deceive even the elect. How are the elect deceived?

By false prophets!

EGW has had failed prophecies that can be proven with the bible, so if you defend her and don't flee from her teachings as God instructs you to do, you are pleasing man and not God!

If that is what you seek Vic, more power to you. But I will continue to pray that you will come to realize anything to do with a false prophet only leads to destruction not eternal life.

Peace Brother

Vic Hays
07-25-2011, 14:07
Vic, Let's examine 1 thess.4:16.
Because the Lord Himself shall descend
from heaven with a shout of command,
with the voice of an archangel and
with the trumpet of God; and the dead in
Christ shall rise first;


1. You say base your who believe on the nature of Jesus on this 1 verse.
You say Jesus is the arch angel doing the shouting,

Let's look at it for what it really is saying.

First it says Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout of command.

2. Ok the next part tells us who is doing the shouting
with the voice of a arch angel.

This does not say Jesus is doing the shouting, it is clear at His comming the angels will be shouting and sounding the trump!


Peace Brother


[/FONT]

1. I never said that I base my belief on one text. You said that.

You say that Jesus is the one shouting the command, Very Good.
Did you know that Jesus is the leader of the angels?
This is what the archangel is, the leader of the angels.

Revelation 19:13 And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
19:14 And the armies [which were] in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

2. The second part of the text says that Jesus shouts with the voice of the archangel and the trump of God. The verse says nothing about other angels shouting and blowing the trumpet. It was Jesus who commanded Lazarus to come forth from the tomb. Why would it be any different at the resurrection of the second coming?
What you said is a lie so you are a false prophet by your own judgment. The only reason you said "it is clear at His coming the angels will be shouting and sounding the trump" is because you want it to be your way.

Why not believe the Bible? It is so much easier than making things up as you go along. BTW there are more texts.

Question for you: Do you understand the difference between subjective and objective? Subjectivity is coloring things with your emotions. Objectivity is examining things as they are without this coloring or twisting. The study of the Bible is so much better if studied objectively.

achysklic
07-25-2011, 14:50
1. I never said that I base my belief on one text. You said that.

You say that Jesus is the one shouting the command, Very Good.
Did you know that Jesus is the leader of the angels?
This is what the archangel is, the leader of the angels.

Revelation 19:13 And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
19:14 And the armies [which were] in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

2. The second part of the text says that Jesus shouts with the voice of the archangel and the trump of God. The verse says nothing about other angels shouting and blowing the trumpet. It was Jesus who commanded Lazarus to come forth from the tomb. Why would it be any different at the resurrection of the second coming?
What you said is a lie so you are a false prophet by your own judgment. The only reason you said "it is clear at His coming the angels will be shouting and sounding the trump" is because you want it to be your way.

Why not believe the Bible? It is so much easier than making things up as you go along. BTW there are more texts.

Question for you: Do you understand the difference between subjective and objective? Subjectivity is coloring things with your emotions. Objectivity is examining things as they are without this coloring or twisting. The study of the Bible is so much better if studied objectively.

Vic, no offence do you really have this much trouble reading what people actually write?

I never said Jesus was the one shouting the command...

Go back and reread what I posted I broke it down so you could understand it and you still didn't read it.

I clearly showed that the arch angels shouted the command..... Nowhere did I say Jesus did.

It's obvious if you read scripture you know that Jesus returns at the last trump....If you kept Gods Holy Days you would know this.

AT the sounding of the last trump and the shouting of the arch angels.. Jesus returns..

How hard is this to grasp?

I guess I need to go get all the scripture that shows and points to Jesus return to clear this up... I really thought you knew alittle more about scripture than you obviously do Vic.


Vic you are abit twisted to say I am a false prophet......lol From this statement alone I can see you have no clue what a false prophet is if it bit you on your nose.

Vic, Not only is Jesus leader of the angels He is leader of all..... Is a arch angel leader of all?

Jesus was not created correct?
The bible is clear angels were created, so how can Jesus be a angel?.............lol


This is so bizarre. no wonder people kill themselves to get out of these cults

Vic Hays
07-25-2011, 15:36
Let's look at it for what it really is saying.

First it says Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout of command.

[/FONT]



Vic, no offence do you really have this much trouble reading what people actually write?

I never said Jesus was the one shouting the command...

[/FONT]

Do you have dyslexia? Perhaps you forgot your meds? This is getting spooky. A ghostwriter writing for achysklic.

achysklic
07-25-2011, 15:51
Do you have dyslexia? Perhaps you forgot your meds? This is getting spooky. A ghostwriter writing for achysklic.


Vic, I see now why you are so confused. Go up to post #60 and read this.

"First it says Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout of command.

Ok the next part tells us who is doing the shouting
with the voice of a arch angel.

This does not say Jesus is doing the shouting, it is clear at His comming the angels will be shouting and sounding the trump!"

I clearly explain who is doing the shouting.

I believe it when it says the whole would is deceived ..geesh

Vic Hays
07-25-2011, 17:17
Vic, I see now why you are so confused. Go up to post #60 and read this.

"First it says Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout of command.

Ok the next part tells us who is doing the shouting
with the voice of a arch angel.

This does not say Jesus is doing the shouting, it is clear at His comming the angels will be shouting and sounding the trump!"

I clearly explain who is doing the shouting.

I believe it when it says the whole would is deceived ..geesh

The fact is that the Bible does not say that the angels are shouting. This idea is being inserted there by you. This is you being subjective as in coloring the Bible text to fit your understanding. I am trying to be patient with you and save you problems in the future. What you are doing is called jumping to conclusions or going off half cocked.

What God expects from us is justice, love, honesty, faith. He is not going to judge us on what we know so much as how we treat others.

Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Norske
07-26-2011, 18:44
Norske,
What happened in your life to make you so angry and bitter?

Do you hate God because of something you think He's done to you "unjustly?"

Been away from the computer for a while.

Read my post again.

Just where did I say I have something against God?

I have no issues with "God". I simply am not convinced he/she/it actually exists . If she/he/it actually does exist, he/she/it does a very poor job of proving that existence in unmistakeable fashion.

I have serious issues with self-righteous clergy, past and present, who claim to speak on behalf of a God who does not him/her/itself choose to make it unmistakeably clear he/she/it exists.

Clergy who demand that we conduct our lives in accordance with their dictates, and who demand our material resources to avoid actually making an honest living.

They are no better than con men.

The issue here is not me.

The issue is not my "bitterness".

The issue is the continuing "con" and the con-men clergy who make their living off it.

Grow up and admit that you do not actually know what is going to happen to either of our souls after we die any more than I do.

Roering
07-26-2011, 22:30
Vic and ACHY match up to see who's theology needs the least tin foil.....

Two fundies enter...one fundie leaves......
Two fundies enter...one fundie leaves......
Two fundies enter...one fundie leaves......
Two fundies enter...one fundie leaves......

achysklic
07-27-2011, 03:29
Vic and ACHY match up to see who's theology needs the least tin foil.....

Two fundies enter...one fundie leaves......
Two fundies enter...one fundie leaves......
Two fundies enter...one fundie leaves......
Two fundies enter...one fundie leaves......


Well atleast I back how I believe up with scripture, Can you say the same? Naaaaaaaa:crying:

adv
07-27-2011, 05:12
Lol, every thread about religion turns into a bloody bun fight around here.

Norske
07-27-2011, 12:13
Lol, every thread about religion turns into a bloody bun fight around here.

A stranger walks up to you on the street and says:

"Hi. God talks to me and told me to tell you that you are supposed to do anything and everthing I say or after you die your soul will be condemned to enternal torment in Hades."

Is said stranger:

(1) Insane?

(2) Lying?

(3) Or is it that God really DOES talk to him and you had darned well BETTER do anything and everything he says or your soul will be condemned to eternal torment in Hades?

Chances are, you are going to decide that said stranger is either (1) Lying or (2) Insane and that the chances that you actually have a case of a (3) genuine capital-H HOLY Man right there in your face are pretty slim.

OK.

So as to the Bible, both Testaments, we are required to believe, on FAITH (a word that should be four letters but actually has five letters) that each and every schmuck who, over period of something like 2,000 to 4,000 years ago wrote the words that today make up the Bible was indeed a case of (3); jen-u-wine "God Talks to ME" capital-H HOLY Man.

And that NO ONE who wrote down the words that now make up the Bible was a case of (1) Insanity and/or (2) Lying.

:dunno:

Delete "Bible" and insert "Quaran", delete "God" and insert "Allah", etc., with respect to every other so-called "Holy Book" ever written.

Religions are all scams. :steamed:

Religions invent their Gods. :wow:

New religions come and old religions go, just so new Clergy can continue to get a piece of the pie in the sky and avoid having to actually work for a living.

Day after week after year after decade after century after millenia. :faint:

The same old scam. :steamed:

achysklic
07-27-2011, 12:31
A stranger walks up to you on the street and says:

"Hi. God talks to me and told me to tell you that you are supposed to do anything and everthing I say or after you die your soul will be condemned to enternal torment in Hades."

Is said stranger:

(1) Insane?

(2) Lying?

(3) Or is it that God really DOES talk to him and you had darned well BETTER do anything and everything he says or your soul will be condemned to eternal torment in Hades?

Chances are, you are going to decide that said stranger is either (1) Lying or (2) Insane and that the chances that you actually have a case of a (3) genuine capital-H HOLY Man right there in your face are pretty slim.

OK.

So as to the Bible, both Testaments, we are required to believe, on FAITH (a word that should be four letters but actually has five letters) that each and every schmuck who, over period of something like 2,000 to 4,000 years ago wrote the words that today make up the Bible was indeed a case of (3); jen-u-wine "God Talks to ME" capital-H HOLY Man.

And that NO ONE who wrote down the words that now make up the Bible was a case of (1) Insanity and/or (2) Lying.

:dunno:

Delete "Bible" and insert "Quaran", delete "God" and insert "Allah", etc., with respect to every other so-called "Holy Book" ever written.

Religions are all scams. :steamed:

Religions invent their Gods. :wow:

New religions come and old religions go, just so new Clergy can continue to get a piece of the pie in the sky and avoid having to actually work for a living.

Day after week after year after decade after century after millenia. :faint:

The same old scam. :steamed:

What's this really have to do with what is a false prophet? I guess some like to troll everything

Roering
07-27-2011, 17:19
Well atleast I back how I believe up with scripture, Can you say the same? Naaaaaaaa:crying:

Of course I can't and come to think of it neither can you.

Can you show me with scripture the justification for the belief you maintain that you live in the United States? Cuz I don't see any mention of it in scripture???

achysklic
07-27-2011, 19:35
Of course I can't and come to think of it neither can you.

Can you show me with scripture the justification for the belief you maintain that you live in the United States? Cuz I don't see any mention of it in scripture???Do you actually have anything of value to add to this topic?

O

Norske
07-27-2011, 21:27
What's this really have to do with what is a false prophet? I guess some like to troll everything

To repeat what I said in my first post for the obviously literacy challenged, "it has to do with what is a false prophet?" in that ALL prophets are false because none of them actually speak on behalf of "God".

Why are there so MANY Gods?

Why are there so MANY religions?

Why are there so MANY variations of religions within Religions?

How many people do you know who are sure that "their" religion is the only "right" one and all others are false? What if ALL religions are equally false? :dunno:

There are ONLY TWO invariable constants about Religions throughout history, worldwide.

(1) The existence of A Religion of some kind or another.

(2) Clergy within said Religion who derive their sustenance from the contributions of the faithful marks who buy whatever is their load of nonsense about "what God wants" of them.

Some Clergy say God demands a 10% Tithe envelope in the offering plate every Sunday. Some such Clergy demand to see your Tax Returns to ensure that you are not shorting God's take from you.

At least one Clergyman said that God demanded that several hundred faithful followers feed cyanide-laced Kool-Aide to their children and then drink some themselves. And they did.

Some Clergy say that God demands that they hijack airliners and slam them into skyscrapers. And they did.

Gee, God sure cannot seem to make up his mind about what he wants from us, does he/she/it?

Could it possibly be that (gasp!) the unquestionable Clergy are lying to us about what God wants from us? Either because they are just as deluded as their predecessors who lied to them, or they are simply lying for their own personal benefit? Hard to say which, but it doesn't matter anyway.

Even the Gods themselves are not constant.

That which is "important" is that which is always a constant.

Gods are never constant from one religion to another.

Therefore, the details of the individual God worshipped are unimportant.

They are "mportant" only to provide moral authority to the clergy, so said clergy can demand material support of the gullible faithful.

:whistling:

They also waste a lot of time on meaningless "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" arguments and "Holy Book" quotations such as you see thread after thread after thread about here in the GT-RF.

achysklic
07-28-2011, 03:04
To repeat what I said in my first post for the obviously literacy challenged, "it has to do with what is a false prophet?" in that ALL prophets are false because none of them actually speak on behalf of "God".

Why are there so MANY Gods?

Why are there so MANY religions?

Why are there so MANY variations of religions within Religions?

How many people do you know who are sure that "their" religion is the only "right" one and all others are false? What if ALL religions are equally false? :dunno:

There are ONLY TWO invariable constants about Religions throughout history, worldwide.

(1) The existence of A Religion of some kind or another.

(2) Clergy within said Religion who derive their sustenance from the contributions of the faithful marks who buy whatever is their load of nonsense about "what God wants" of them.

Some Clergy say God demands a 10% Tithe envelope in the offering plate every Sunday. Some such Clergy demand to see your Tax Returns to ensure that you are not shorting God's take from you.

At least one Clergyman said that God demanded that several hundred faithful followers feed cyanide-laced Kool-Aide to their children and then drink some themselves. And they did.

Some Clergy say that God demands that they hijack airliners and slam them into skyscrapers. And they did.

Gee, God sure cannot seem to make up his mind about what he wants from us, does he/she/it?

Could it possibly be that (gasp!) the unquestionable Clergy are lying to us about what God wants from us? Either because they are just as deluded as their predecessors who lied to them, or they are simply lying for their own personal benefit? Hard to say which, but it doesn't matter anyway.

Even the Gods themselves are not constant.

That which is "important" is that which is always a constant.

Gods are never constant from one religion to another.

Therefore, the details of the individual God worshipped are unimportant.

They are "mportant" only to provide moral authority to the clergy, so said clergy can demand material support of the gullible faithful.

:whistling:

They also waste a lot of time on meaningless "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" arguments and "Holy Book" quotations such as you see thread after thread after thread about here in the GT-RF.

Man what a neg. person you are. I still wonder why you even bother posting. You post the same crap with the same theme in every thread.

I guess here is how you see it. This thread mentions God so I can inject my opinion in it reguardless of what is really being discussed.

You are a true Glock Talk Troll.

Blast
07-28-2011, 04:29
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll190/ed335dot/Misc/albert-einstein-trolls.jpg

Norske
07-28-2011, 17:48
Man what a neg. person you are. I still wonder why you even bother posting. You post the same crap with the same theme in every thread.

I guess here is how you see it. This thread mentions God so I can inject my opinion in it reguardless of what is really being discussed.

You are a true Glock Talk Troll.

I beg to differ.

I am NOT a "troll".

"Freedom OF Religion" logically includes Freedom FROM Religion.

I am merely exercising my 1st Amendment rights by pointing out what a useless waste organized Religion is, was, and evermore, shall be.

It is a self-perpetuating, millenia-long, con game conceived by, run by, and for the benefit of, "Clergy", whatever they call themselves.

Religions invent their Gods. NOT the other way around as they would have the ever gullible "faithful" "Marks" believe for generation after generation. This is the reason why there are so many different so-called "Gods".

No.

NOT a "troll".

Just the kid who finally pointed out that the Emperor was not wearing any clothing, that's all.

:supergrin:

achysklic
07-28-2011, 18:51
I beg to differ.

I am NOT a "troll".

"Freedom OF Religion" logically includes Freedom FROM Religion.

I am merely exercising my 1st Amendment rights by pointing out what a useless waste organized Religion is, was, and evermore, shall be.

It is a self-perpetuating, millenia-long, con game conceived by, run by, and for the benefit of, "Clergy", whatever they call themselves.

Religions invent their Gods. NOT the other way around as they would have the ever gullible "faithful" "Marks" believe for generation after generation. This is the reason why there are so many different so-called "Gods".

No.

NOT a "troll".

Just the kid who finally pointed out that the Emperor was not wearing any clothing, that's all.

:supergrin:


Actually you are a Troll in the sense you jump into any topics that is christian based and rant ant spill crap not related to the Topic at hand.

Troll

Norske
07-29-2011, 08:51
Actually you are a Troll in the sense you jump into any topics that is christian based and rant ant spill crap not related to the Topic at hand.

Troll

This is a Religious forum, where individual views on religious issues may be expressed.

MY individual view is that ALL organized religion is a crock of guano.

A multi-millenial, self-perpetuating con game perpetrated upon humanity as a whole by self-serving "clergy" within each and every religion.

Perpetrated for the material, physical benefit of said "clergy".

Nothing more. Nothing less.

As such, it is a valid religious "view" and therefore is NEVER off topic in this forum.

If my view of the truth is unpalatable to the "faithful" marks who drink the clergy poison Kool-Aide from to day to week to year to decade to century to millenia, so be it.

I am simply the constant reminder that in discussions of ANY "religious" issue, the emperor has no clothes since "religion" itself has no REAL basis outside of superstition.

:tongueout:

achysklic
07-29-2011, 09:18
This is a Religious forum, where individual views on religious issues may be expressed.

MY individual view is that ALL organized religion is a crock of guano.

A multi-millenial, self-perpetuating con game perpetrated upon humanity as a whole by self-serving "clergy" within each and every religion.

Perpetrated for the material, physical benefit of said "clergy".

Nothing more. Nothing less.

As such, it is a valid religious "view" and therefore is NEVER off topic in this forum.

If my view of the truth is unpalatable to the "faithful" marks who drink the clergy poison Kool-Aide from to day to week to year to decade to century to millenia, so be it.

I am simply the constant reminder that in discussions of ANY "religious" issue, the emperor has no clothes since "religion" itself has no REAL basis outside of superstition.

:tongueout:


See this is where your confusion sets in. Your views are ok in this forum. However, in a specific thread you come in and ramble having nothing to do with the topic at hand.

This is being a TROLL

Roering
07-29-2011, 10:51
See this is where your confusion sets in. Your views are ok in this forum. However, in a specific thread you come in and ramble having nothing to do with the topic at hand.

This is being a TROLL

I call it being drunk.

Vic Hays
07-29-2011, 12:00
I call it being drunk.

This is why the Bible sets itself up as the standard of Truth.

Isaiah 28:7-10 But they also have erred through wine, And through intoxicating drink are out of the way; The priest and prophet have erred through intoxicating drink, they are swallowed up by wine, They are ouit of the way through intoxicating drink; They err in vision, they stumble in judgment. For all tables are full of vomit and filth; no place is clean.
Whom will he teach knowledge? And whom will he make to understand the message? Those just drawn from the breasts? For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept, lLine upon line, line upon line, Here a little and there a little.

Roering
07-29-2011, 17:00
This is why the Bible sets itself up as the standard of Truth.

By saying that the Church is the standard of truth???

Vic Hays
07-29-2011, 17:56
By saying that the Church is the standard of truth???

I know you guys beleive that the Catholic Church is the standard of truth.
Most Protestants believe that the Bible is the only rule of faith and practice. This is from the Protest at Spires where the term Protestant came from.

FlyboyLDB
07-29-2011, 21:40
Those videos are awesome...Why are so many people decieved by them?

I just don't get the people who are followers of

Miller, Harold Camping, Armstrong, Ellen White, ect. These people all clearly proved they were false prophets yet Millions cling on to the teachings and the church they led.

Why?
There is alot of good,smart people in these groups whom are abit brainwashed I guess.

Ditto!
Because they drink of the kool-aid. People are hungry and just take what is tossed to them. There is no perfect religion - that's right - none! But then there are the false prophets, the cults, the ones that add to or take away from Christ. Wake up people! You would have thought I slaughtered Christ when I spoke once to some SDA people talking about Ellen G. White and filled them in on what I had learned. I kid you not, if I had spoke bad about Christ I would have been ok in their eyes - just not Ellen. I know the SDA inside and out, and I will say they use some of the same tactics that other cults do. Do not get angry with me! Do your own research! If you get angry, I will just assume you are still drinking the kool-aid, are brain washed, too lazy to do your own research and too blinded to see the truth. I will absolutely not debate anyone on this. I will, however, encourage one to do some true soul searching homework. Remember some of the points others have made - 1 prophecy that does not come true and one is a false prophet! Take away or add to Christ and you have a cult religion! Pretty simple. Here goes you one from the record books. Don't shoot the messenger.

Although William Miller admitted his mistake regarding October 22, 1844, Ellen White never did.

Answer: This is true. After the Great Disappointment, William Miller admitted his mistake regarding Christ's returning on October 22, 1844, and he also gave up believing that October 22 had any prophetic significance. On the other hand, Ellen White never discarded her belief in the prophetic significance of the October 22 date, so she had no reason to admit a mistake had been made regarding the calculation, beyond the obvious fact that Christ had not returned that day.

What choice did she have? Either admit she was wrong - oops! or Just say that there was some prophetic event that did happen on Oct 22nd 1844 - probably in heaven. Hmm, what good does that do? What I thought.

Schabesbert
07-29-2011, 22:10
Originally Posted by Vic Hays
This is why the Bible sets itself up as the standard of Truth.By saying that the Church is the standard of truth???
:rofl:
Ziiiip
... the sound of your point going right over Vic's head.

I know you guys beleive that the Catholic Church is the standard of truth.
Yes, and the Bible is a witness to and confirmation of this fact.


Most Protestants believe that the Bible is the only rule of faith and practice.
Yes. If you disavow the actual authority that Christ set up, that leaves a vacuum that must be filled by something.

Of course the Bible is authoritative. It is a part of the Apostolic Tradition left us by Christ. But it is not the ONLY rule of faith. Especially since it can be misinterpreted (as St. Peter said explicitely in 2Peter 3:16).

Roering
07-29-2011, 22:51
I know you guys beleive that the Catholic Church is the standard of truth.
Most Protestants believe that the Bible is the only rule of faith and practice.

Which is not biblical, But that's all they have left.

Vic Hays
07-30-2011, 09:07
Which is not biblical, But that's all they have left.

You can believe that your sect has all the authority of God if you want to. I don't believe it because my God is bigger than your sect. God chooses who he gives apostolic authority, not man.

Ephesians 4:11 And He himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers.

Luke 6:44 "For every tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they gather grapes from a bramble bush.

Your sect has had a very checkered past. There have always been the faithful in and out of the Catholic Church but the RCC itself has shown that it is not the voice of God.

Jesus clearly said how that he would manifest Himself to believers after His ascention. Only having Jesus words is better than all the philosophy of the world.

John 14:21-24 "He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who love Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him." Judas, (not Iscariot) said to Him. "Lord, how is it that You will manifest Yourself to us, and not to the world?" Jesus answered and said to him, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. "He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's who sent Me.

Roering
07-30-2011, 12:27
I know you guys beleive that the Catholic Church is the standard of truth.
Most Protestants believe that the Bible is the only rule of faith and practice. This is from the Protest at Spires where the term Protestant came from.

Dude, I was quoting Timothy.

Schabesbert
07-30-2011, 15:55
Originally Posted by Vic Hays
I know you guys beleive that the Catholic Church is the standard of truth.
Dude, I was quoting Timothy.
Vic must've been addressing St. Paul in the "you guys" quote above.
Yes, St. Paul obviously believs that the Church is the standard of Truth. He said so.

Norske
07-30-2011, 18:36
See this is where your confusion sets in. Your views are ok in this forum. However, in a specific thread you come in and ramble having nothing to do with the topic at hand.

This is being a TROLL

In any thread dealing with or discussing religion, pointing out that religion itself is a crock and therefore the thread is itself a crock is never off topic.

:rofl:

achysklic
07-31-2011, 03:03
In any thread dealing with or discussing religion, pointing out that religion itself is a crock and therefore the thread is itself a crock is never off topic.

:rofl:

Face it you're always off topic Troll

Vic Hays
07-31-2011, 13:49
By saying that the Church is the standard of truth???

That may be your interpretation, but the Bible does not say the Church is the "standard" of Truth. It also does not specify Catholic.

Roering
08-01-2011, 00:49
That may be your interpretation, but the Bible does not say the Church is the "standard" of Truth. It also does not specify Catholic.

Check out Timothy.

Schabesbert
08-01-2011, 08:31
That may be your interpretation, but the Bible does not say the Church is the "standard" of Truth.
It doesn't?

Oh, but the Bible DOES say that IT is the "standard" of Truth? After all, you claimed: "the Bible sets itself up as the standard of Truth."

The Bible doesn't even say what the Bible consists of! It took the Catholic Church to do that!

It also does not specify Catholic.
:rofl:
The Bible doesn't say it, but where it DOES say it it doesn't mean "Catholic," huh? You're too funny. You dance alot, but not well.

Vic Hays
08-01-2011, 08:36
It doesn't?

Oh, but the Bible DOES say that IT is the "standard" of Truth? After all, you claimed: "the Bible sets itself up as the standard of Truth."

The Bible doesn't even say what the Bible consists of! It took the Catholic Church to do that!


:rofl:
The Bible doesn't say it, but where it DOES say it it doesn't mean "Catholic," huh? You're too funny. You dance alot, but not well.

I understand that your church prides itself on being the last word. I must, however stick with Jesus and the Bible.

Roering
08-01-2011, 10:26
I understand that your church prides itself on being the last word. I must, however stick with Jesus and the Bible.

Technically You're right Vic. Nowhere will you find the word Catholic since it is a Latin term.

The meaning is there though. Catholic means "universal".

Read the end of Matthew...the great commission. Jesus instructs his disciples to go out to "all nations". That is the meaning of catholic (with a lower case c) and you can very well see it in practice. The Catholic Church extends itself (or at least aspires to) to all nations.

Vic Hays
08-01-2011, 13:43
Technically You're right Vic. Nowhere will you find the word Catholic since it is a Latin term.

The meaning is there though. Catholic means "universal".

Read the end of Matthew...the great commission. Jesus instructs his disciples to go out to "all nations". That is the meaning of catholic (with a lower case c) and you can very well see it in practice. The Catholic Church extends itself (or at least aspires to) to all nations.

Jesus commission was to take the Gospel to all nations. All believers are part of Jesus universal Church. Some sects have their departures and failings as far as the Truth of the gospel. No human man other that Jesus Christ is head of the universal Church.

achysklic
08-01-2011, 13:53
Jesus commission was to take the Gospel to all nations. All believers are part of Jesus universal Church. Some sects have their departures and failings as far as the Truth of the gospel. No human man other that Jesus Christ is head of the universal Church.

Guess this leaves your group out then Vic.

http://news.adventist.org/2010/06/president-story.html

Schabesbert
08-01-2011, 14:27
All believers are part of Jesus universal Church.
True, in a sense, but not like you mean it.
In fact, all monotheists (believers in a single God) are part of the universal Church.

Divided in the Truth and separated, but "part" of the Church nonetheless.

However, there IS a visible Church that Jesus founded.
There HAS TO BE or else Jesus' admonition to "tell it to the Church" would be meaningless.

If I wanted to "tell it to the Church" [Matt 18:17], I need to be able to FIND the Church. Like Paul & Barnabas did in Acts 15.

No human man other that Jesus Christ is head of the universal Church.
True. However, He DID appoint a "prime minister" just as the Davidic kings (which was the foreshadow of Christ's Kingdom) did before them. One who was given the "Keys of the Kingdom" and who could adjudicate things with the King's authority.

Vic Hays
08-01-2011, 14:39
Guess this leaves your group out then Vic.

http://news.adventist.org/2010/06/president-story.html

Pastor Wilson is the head of the corporation of Seventh-day Adventists. This is the governing body of the Church. He is not the head of the Church. The head of the Church is Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 5:23 For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the savior of the body.

achysklic
08-01-2011, 14:43
Pastor Wilson is the head of the corporation of Seventh-day Adventists. This is the governing body of the Church. He is not the head of the Church. The head of the Church is Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 5:23 For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the savior of the body.
Maybe I should start a whole new thread on church hierarchy and what the Bible actually teaches on it. It may suprise you.

Vic Hays
08-01-2011, 14:49
Maybe I should start a whole new thread on church hierarchy and what the Bible actually teaches on it. It may suprise you.

Nothing you would come up with wouild surprise me except if you were to get something in line with what the Bible actually teaches.

Roering
08-01-2011, 15:05
Pastor Wilson is the head of the corporation of Seventh-day Adventists. This is the governing body of the Church. He is not the head of the Church. The head of the Church is Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 5:23 For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the savior of the body.

Your Church is governed by.......a corporation? Can you tell me where THAT is found in scripture? :shocked:

achysklic
08-01-2011, 15:30
Your Church is governed by.......a corporation? Can you tell me where THAT is found in scripture? :shocked:

Yeah it is....but it won't last according to the Bible. The SDA are divided among themselves. They have the Adventists, the Davidians, and the Branch Davidians ( good ol Waco nuts).

Gods tells us the fate of a house divided.

Luke 11:17 Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them: "Any kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and a house divided against itself will fall.

Vic Hays
08-01-2011, 20:12
Your Church is governed by.......a corporation? Can you tell me where THAT is found in scripture? :shocked:

Does it seem strange to you that the Seventh-day Adventist Church has a bottom up power structure rather than an authoritarian top down style such as the RCC? We do not have a democratic church, but it is a representative style of structure.

The ground at the foot of the Cross is level. We do not have two classes of believers like a priestly class and the laity.

Jesus is the authority in our Church. The Bible is the only rule of faith and practice.

Roering
08-01-2011, 20:21
Does it seem strange to you that the Seventh-day Adventist Church has a bottom up power structure rather than an authoritarian top down style such as the RCC? We do not have a democratic church, but it is a representative style of structure.

The ground at the foot of the Cross is level. We do not have two classes of believers like a priestly class and the laity.

Jesus is the authority in our Church. The Bible is the only rule of faith and practice.

Lots of things seem strange to me. I'm surprised though that it would be a corporation rather than a non profit entity. Did they do something to blow their non profit status or something?

So your authority is at the bottom then?

achysklic
08-02-2011, 06:48
God hates hierarchy, it is referred to as the doctrine of the Nicolaitans. If anyone would like to have a in depth discussion on this topic I can start a thread on this.

It really is important you understand this and not get sucked into the church governments most church follow today.

Jesus HATES this!

achysklic
08-02-2011, 06:56
Does it seem strange to you that the Seventh-day Adventist Church has a bottom up power structure rather than an authoritarian top down style such as the RCC? We do not have a democratic church, but it is a representative style of structure.

The ground at the foot of the Cross is level. We do not have two classes of believers like a priestly class and the laity.

Jesus is the authority in our Church. The Bible is the only rule of faith and practice.


I love the quote from your leader Ted Wilson. It sums up the state the SDA church is in and why it is deemed a cult.

"I do not know everything, but I shall seek wisdom from counselors and from the Bible and from the Spirit of Prophecy," he said, referring to the writings of church co-founder Ellen White.

Vic Hays
08-02-2011, 07:59
Lots of things seem strange to me. I'm surprised though that it would be a corporation rather than a non profit entity. Did they do something to blow their non profit status or something?

So your authority is at the bottom then?

Our authority is at the top,Jesus , but comes from the bottom up through His body of believers.

The corporation is non-profit.

Look at it this way.

When you say "church", you can be referring to either the people of the church or the leadership of the church.

The Seventh-day Adventist "church" properly refers to the people of the Church corporately and not to the leadership.

When Jesus said ,"tell it to the church" when dealing with an erring brother, your church leaders will make the decision whereas our church members will make the decision.

That is a big difference.

I Corinthians 6:1-3 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, got to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life?

Schabesbert
08-02-2011, 08:47
When Jesus said ,"tell it to the church" when dealing with an erring brother, your church leaders will make the decision whereas our church members will make the decision.

That is a big difference.
It certainly is a big difference.

OUR way was the way that the Early Church did it. It is the way that people like Paul and Barnabas acted in appealing to the "apostles and the elders."

Ac 15:2 And when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question.

I Corinthians 6:1-3 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, got to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life?

This is an exhortation to follow the FIRST part of Christ's teaching in Matthew 18:
Mt 18:15 "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.
16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses.

Christ then goes on to tell us what to do if THIS (the procedure echoed and advocated in your 1Cor quote above) doesn't work:

17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.



So, in summary: the Catholic model is the same as the Early Church, both in post-Apostolic times AND in Apostolic times, while your model is a novelty.

Roering
08-02-2011, 10:47
God hates hierarchy, it is referred to as the doctrine of the Nicolaitans. If anyone would like to have a in depth discussion on this topic I can start a thread on this.

Achy,

Has not God chosen men throughout time to lead his people? Wouldn't that constitute a hierarchy?

Example: God chose Moses to lead them out of Egypt. The people were to defer to Moses who in turn would defer to the Lord.

That is a hierarchy.

Roering
08-02-2011, 10:52
Our authority is at the top,Jesus , but comes from the bottom up through His body of believers.

Sounds like a model for Anarchy. Or extreme religious freedom. I suppose that could be a fine line.

So if you read through scriptures and find in your interpretation that God actually wants us to keep Sunday holy and you share this with your Church but half of them disagree with you, how would this matter be resolved. Since there is a foundation of Christ and scripture but equal earthly authority? Does the SDA just practice both from now on? After all, who has the authority to say you are wrong?:dunno:

achysklic
08-02-2011, 11:10
Achy,

Has not God chosen men throughout time to lead his people? Wouldn't that constitute a hierarchy?

Example: God chose Moses to lead them out of Egypt. The people were to defer to Moses who in turn would defer to the Lord.

That is a hierarchy.

Actually God always said He would lead His people. Man wanted leaders like moses.God only gave them leaders because they asked not because thats how He intended it to be.

Schabesbert
08-02-2011, 11:36
Actually God always said He would lead His people. Man wanted leaders like moses.God only gave them leaders because they asked not because thats how He intended it to be.
That's sooo contrary to scripture that I could literally provide hundreds of examples where you are wrong.

Yes, the Israelites wanted a king "like other nations," but this was NOT a contrast to God personally leading their nation. Rather, it was in contrast to God "raising up a judge" (i.e., a person to lead) whenever the nation needed it and repented.

Vic Hays
08-02-2011, 11:49
It certainly is a big difference.

OUR way was the way that the Early Church did it. It is the way that people like Paul and Barnabas acted in appealing to the "apostles and the elders."

So, in summary: the Catholic model is the same as the Early Church, both in post-Apostolic times AND in Apostolic times, while your model is a novelty.

I disagree with you. If there is a problem in a local church, the local church works on it. What Christ is talking about is individuals with problems in a local church. Do you go running to the Pope for every decision?

Matthew 18:17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

Vic Hays
08-02-2011, 12:00
Sounds like a model for Anarchy. Or extreme religious freedom. I suppose that could be a fine line.

So if you read through scriptures and find in your interpretation that God actually wants us to keep Sunday holy and you share this with your Church but half of them disagree with you, how would this matter be resolved. Since there is a foundation of Christ and scripture but equal earthly authority? Does the SDA just practice both from now on? After all, who has the authority to say you are wrong?:dunno:

The would be anarchy, but the Bible is the standard of faith and practice.

The Bible has the authority. Do you believe that the Holy Spirit can lead the Church or does it require only human wisdom?

Even Catholic theologians agree that the Bible does not require Sunday to be kept. The reason the Sunday is kept is strictly traditional. Your form of church government leads away from the Word of God.

http://biblelight.net/bssb-1443-1444.htm

"And as for the Church's authority, "Is it not it," said he, among other reasons, "that substituted the Lord's day for the Sabbath, which was instituted by God himself? Did it not abolish circumcision, also instituted by God?" Whence it must be concluded, little room as there was for such reasoning, not that the Church is equal to the Word of God, but that it is much superior. "

Schabesbert
08-02-2011, 12:23
I disagree with you.
That's fine; but your personal interpretation would make Christ's teaching irrelevant.

If there is a problem in a local church, the local church works on it. What Christ is talking about is individuals with problems in a local church. Do you go running to the Pope for every decision?
This first assumes that the "local church" [NOTE: "church" is SINGULAR] teaches one and only one doctrine. If not, then Christ's teaching would have no meaning.

Second, when the discrepency regarding the Judaisers and circumcision was NOT able to be resolved locally, what did Paul and Barnabas do?

What would you have them do in your philosophy? Start their own "denomination," apparently.

Schabesbert
08-02-2011, 12:32
The would be anarchy, but the Bible is the standard of faith and practice.

The Bible has the authority. Do you believe that the Holy Spirit can lead the Church or does it require only human wisdom?
Exactly. We believe that it is the Holy Spirit's Authority which guides us, through the Church, as the Bible witnesses.

You believe that only the Bible is authoritative; we believe that the Holy Spirit is our Authority, and has spoke THROUGH the Bible and also guides the Church in properly interpreting that same Bible, as the Bible itself says.

You see, this is the only way that ALL of scripture can be reconciled; you're relegated to pitting one scripture verse against another.

Roering
08-02-2011, 13:51
The would be anarchy, but the Bible is the standard of faith and practice.

The Bible has the authority. Do you believe that the Holy Spirit can lead the Church or does it require only human wisdom?

Even Catholic theologians agree that the Bible does not require Sunday to be kept. The reason the Sunday is kept is strictly traditional. Your form of church government leads away from the Word of God.

http://biblelight.net/bssb-1443-1444.htm

"And as for the Church's authority, "Is it not it," said he, among other reasons, "that substituted the Lord's day for the Sabbath, which was instituted by God himself? Did it not abolish circumcision, also instituted by God?" Whence it must be concluded, little room as there was for such reasoning, not that the Church is equal to the Word of God, but that it is much superior. "

Not a discussion about the Sabbath, I was only using it as a hypothetical example.

Yes, I believe scripture to be authoritative as it is spirit inspired. I also believe that the Church (college of Bishops, etc.) have the authority to interpret scripture. Keep in mind scripture was also written through men.

The Holy spirit does lead the Church, as does Christ but we must follow accordingly(i.e. use the system Christ has set up).

To be more specific, let's say you along with 1/2 of the SDA's interpret scripture to lead you to a Sunday and the other half interprets that the day should be Saturday. How does this get resolved?

Since after all, both sides are deriving their beliefs from what they believe to be the standard of truth.

achysklic
08-02-2011, 13:59
Not a discussion about the Sabbath, I was only using it as a hypothetical example.

Yes, I believe scripture to be authoritative as it is spirit inspired. I also believe that the Church (college of Bishops, etc.) have the authority to interpret scripture. Keep in mind scripture was also written through men.

The Holy spirit does lead the Church, as does Christ but we must follow accordingly(i.e. use the system Christ has set up).

To be more specific, let's say you along with 1/2 of the SDA's interpret scripture to lead you to a Sunday and the other half interprets that the day should be Saturday. How does this get resolved?

Since after all, both sides are deriving their beliefs from what they believe to be the standard of truth.

They have already done this on things other than the Sabbath,

example...some SDA's are trinitarians.....other are NOT.

Some SDA's keep Gods Holy Days.........others do NOT.

Jesus said a house divided shall fall........looks like the SDA house is divided to me..... London bridge is comming down

Vic Hays
08-02-2011, 14:44
Not a discussion about the Sabbath, I was only using it as a hypothetical example.

Yes, I believe scripture to be authoritative as it is spirit inspired. I also believe that the Church (college of Bishops, etc.) have the authority to interpret scripture. Keep in mind scripture was also written through men.

The Holy spirit does lead the Church, as does Christ but we must follow accordingly(i.e. use the system Christ has set up).

To be more specific, let's say you along with 1/2 of the SDA's interpret scripture to lead you to a Sunday and the other half interprets that the day should be Saturday. How does this get resolved?

Since after all, both sides are deriving their beliefs from what they believe to be the standard of truth.

Keep in mind that the college of Bishops is syncretism from the ancient Roman Empire and Mithraism so I wouldn't say that this is the system that God set up as Bert has.

No one man or small group of men makes any major decision. We have a meeting called the General Conference in session every five years with representatives from all over the world to make any major decisions for policy changes.

There is nothing that is above comparison with the Bible.

Again, our church is founded upon Jesus Christ, not Peter.

It is interesting that the Orthodox Church does not believe that one man should rule over the church. Your arrangement makes your governing people prophets. This is like the Watchtower and the Mormons.

Schabesbert
08-02-2011, 15:30
Keep in mind that the college of Bishops is syncretism from the ancient Roman Empire and Mithraism so I wouldn't say that this is the system that God set up as Bert has.
I'd be careful if I were you, accusing Jesus of syncretism as you have.
After all, HE set up the original 12 Apostles.

No, despite your claims, Jesus didn't practice Mithraism. You're just confused.

Again, our church is founded upon Jesus Christ, not Peter.
You are sooo confused, Vic.
Our Church was founded BY Jesus Christ, as He said in Matthew 16.

Yours was founded in the 1800s.

achysklic
08-02-2011, 15:37
You are sooo confused, Vic.
Our Church was founded BY Jesus Christ, as He said in Matthew 16.

Yours was founded in the 1800s.
:holysheep:

GunHo198
08-02-2011, 15:41
False Prophet? Isn't that when you make an error in your company check book, and write yourself a big Fat check that bounces days later???

Been there...... :whistling:

Roering
08-02-2011, 15:43
No one man or small group of men makes any major decision. We have a meeting called the General Conference in session every five years with representatives from all over the world to make any major decisions for policy changes.

So how many people are we talking about then that go to this general conference?

In other words, it looks like there was one in 2010 in Atlanta. How many went to it?

Vic Hays
08-02-2011, 21:48
So how many people are we talking about then that go to this general conference?

In other words, it looks like there was one in 2010 in Atlanta. How many went to it?

There was one in 2010 . I don't know the numbers.

Vic Hays
08-02-2011, 22:00
[QUOTE=Schabesbert;17719337]

No, despite your claims, Jesus didn't practice Mithraism. You're just confused.

QUOTE]

Jesus didn't practice Mithraism, but thr Romans did. We have gone over this before. The Pontifical College was in use in the Roman Empire before there was a Christian.

Why do you make these absurd arguements?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_of_Pontiffs

"Until the 3rd century BC, the college elected the pontifex maximus from their own number. The right of the college to elect their own pontifex maximus was returned, but the circumstances surrounding this are unclear. This changed again after Sulla, when in response to his reforms, the election of the pontifex maximus was once again placed in the hands of an assembly of seventeen of the twenty-five tribes. However, the college still controlled which candidates the assembly voted on. During the Empire, the office was publicly elected from the candidates of existing pontiffs, until the Emperors began to automatically assume the title, following Julius Caesar’s example. The pontifex maximus was a powerful political position to hold and the candidates for office were often very active political members of the college. Many, such as Julius Caesar, went on to hold consulships during their time as pontifex maximus."

Schabesbert
08-03-2011, 10:00
No, despite your claims, Jesus didn't practice Mithraism. You're just confused.



Jesus didn't practice Mithraism, but thr Romans did.

We have gone over this before. The Pontifical College was in use in the Roman Empire before there was a Christian.

So?

What do you think this shows?

You constantly use innuendo and suggestion to "say" things that you don't really want to pronounce, since it sounds silly when brought out in the open.

Why do you make these absurd arguements?
What you really shoud ask is why do I answer your absurd arguements[sic].

I ask myself those questions sometimes.

Vic Hays
08-03-2011, 14:19
So?

What do you think this shows?

You constantly use innuendo and suggestion to "say" things that you don't really want to pronounce, since it sounds silly when brought out in the open.

.

Sorry Bert, I will spell it out for you.

The Pontifical college continued into the third century as a pagan worship system government in the Roman Empire.

Therefore, it was not the system of government that Jesus set up. Instead, as Christianity merged with the pagan system of worship, it took over the same governance system.

The holy days and gods changed names. What is called "tradition" that varies from the Bible is in reality mostly inhereited from the old Roman religion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_of_Pontiffs

"Until the 3rd century BC, the college elected the pontifex maximus from their own number. The right of the college to elect their own pontifex maximus was returned, but the circumstances surrounding this are unclear. This changed again after Sulla, when in response to his reforms, the election of the pontifex maximus was once again placed in the hands of an assembly of seventeen of the twenty-five tribes. However, the college still controlled which candidates the assembly voted on. During the Empire, the office was publicly elected from the candidates of existing pontiffs, until the Emperors began to automatically assume the title, following Julius Caesar’s example. The pontifex maximus was a powerful political position to hold and the candidates for office were often very active political members of the college. Many, such as Julius Caesar, went on to hold consulships during their time as pontifex maximus."

achysklic
08-03-2011, 14:53
Even though I agree with Vic here. I am really getting tired of everyone using wikipedia as a source.

It is like using the NIV ( the worst translation on the market)

Schabesbert
08-03-2011, 16:11
Sorry Bert, I will spell it out for you.

The Pontifical college continued into the third century as a pagan worship system government in the Roman Empire.

Therefore, it was not the system of government that Jesus set up. Instead, as Christianity merged with the pagan system of worship, it took over the same governance system.

The holy days and gods changed names. What is called "tradition" that varies from the Bible is in reality mostly inhereited from the old Roman religion.

So, you're accusing Christianity of syncretism? Is that what you're (not) saying?

You've got quite a problem, here, in that Christianity well before this time (in fact, from the very time of the Apostles) believed things that you disavow in your newly-invented system, and which Catholics believe and practice today.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_of_Pontiffs

"Until the 3rd century BC, the college elected the pontifex maximus from their own number. The right of the college to elect their own pontifex maximus was returned, but the circumstances surrounding this are unclear. This changed again after Sulla, when in response to his reforms, the election of the pontifex maximus was once again placed in the hands of an assembly of seventeen of the twenty-five tribes. However, the college still controlled which candidates the assembly voted on. During the Empire, the office was publicly elected from the candidates of existing pontiffs, until the Emperors began to automatically assume the title, following Julius Caesar’s example. The pontifex maximus was a powerful political position to hold and the candidates for office were often very active political members of the college. Many, such as Julius Caesar, went on to hold consulships during their time as pontifex maximus."
I get it -- you're using a fallacy of relevance here.

Major premise: The Roman religion had a "college of Pontiffs" with a "pontifex maximus"
Minor premise: The Catholic Church calls the Pope "Pontifex Maximus"
False conclusion: The Catholic Church is a continuation of the Roman religion

Schabesbert
08-03-2011, 16:12
Even though I agree with Vic here. I am really getting tired of everyone using wikipedia as a source.
At least he USES a source.

achysklic
08-03-2011, 16:41
At least he USES a source.


I know Bert since I am a Sola Scripturalist my source is the Bible, something you catholic never have used as a source!

Better Roering :)

Roering
08-03-2011, 16:42
There was one in 2010 . I don't know the numbers.

Can you ball park it?

Roering
08-03-2011, 16:44
I know Bert since I am a Sola Scriptualist my source is the Bible, something you cathbolics never have used as a source!

What's a "scriptualist"

What's a "cathbolic"

Source heck, I'd settle for a spell check once in awhile.:tongueout:

achysklic
08-03-2011, 16:50
What's a "scriptualist"

What's a "cathbolic"

Source heck, I'd settle for a spell check once in awhile.:tongueout:

It's bad eyes and bad cell phone

Schabesbert
08-03-2011, 16:55
It's bad eyes and bad cell phone
Or, it's unclear thought.

Roering
08-03-2011, 17:02
It's bad eyes and bad cell phone

I forgot. You post on the go.

achysklic
08-03-2011, 17:29
Or, it's unclear thought.

That's ok Bert as long as my thoughts clear long enough to prove you wrong all the time. It actually doesn't take much you are easier than poor ol Vic to prove wrong.

Schabesbert
08-03-2011, 17:41
That's ok Bert as long as my thoughts clear long enough to prove you wrong all the time. It actually doesn't take much you are easier than poor ol Vic to prove wrong.
It's amazing, then, that you've been so unsuccessful at doing so.

Or, can you point me to some place where you've deluded yourself into believing that you had?

Roering
08-03-2011, 20:02
I know Bert since I am a Sola Scripturalist my source is the Bible, something you catholic never have used as a source!

Better Roering :)

Much. The spelling Nazi hereby grants you absolution.

Schabesbert
08-04-2011, 13:35
Repeated since Vic might not have seen this due to achysklic's irrelevant (and misleading) postings:
Sorry Bert, I will spell it out for you.

The Pontifical college continued into the third century as a pagan worship system government in the Roman Empire.

Therefore, it was not the system of government that Jesus set up. Instead, as Christianity merged with the pagan system of worship, it took over the same governance system.

The holy days and gods changed names. What is called "tradition" that varies from the Bible is in reality mostly inhereited from the old Roman religion.

So, you're accusing Christianity of syncretism? Is that what you're (not) saying?

You've got quite a problem, here, in that Christianity well before this time (in fact, from the very time of the Apostles) believed things that you disavow in your newly-invented system, and which Catholics believe and practice today.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_of_Pontiffs

"Until the 3rd century BC, the college elected the pontifex maximus from their own number. The right of the college to elect their own pontifex maximus was returned, but the circumstances surrounding this are unclear. This changed again after Sulla, when in response to his reforms, the election of the pontifex maximus was once again placed in the hands of an assembly of seventeen of the twenty-five tribes. However, the college still controlled which candidates the assembly voted on. During the Empire, the office was publicly elected from the candidates of existing pontiffs, until the Emperors began to automatically assume the title, following Julius Caesar’s example. The pontifex maximus was a powerful political position to hold and the candidates for office were often very active political members of the college. Many, such as Julius Caesar, went on to hold consulships during their time as pontifex maximus."
I get it -- you're using a fallacy of relevance here.

Major premise: The Roman religion had a "college of Pontiffs" with a "pontifex maximus"
Minor premise: The Catholic Church calls the Pope "Pontifex Maximus"
False conclusion: The Catholic Church is a continuation of the Roman religion

Ogreon
08-04-2011, 15:37
I get it -- you're using a fallacy of relevance here.

Major premise: The Roman religion had a "college of Pontiffs" with a "pontifex maximus"
Minor premise: The Catholic Church calls the Pope "Pontifex Maximus"
False conclusion: The Catholic Church is a continuation of the Roman religion

I tend to agree. It would seem quite odd to come into a new language and eschew its vocabulary. To paraphrase myself: It's difficult to translate into Latin and avoid Latin.

If I were bringing the Church into English-speaking territory, why would I come up with a new name for "Chief Priest" when "Chief Priest" is available.

I will admit that I use the term "dao" on occasion. This in no way implies that I am a Daoist. It's a handy term and allows an interplay with "Dow". (My use of that term does not imply that I am a broker of stocks.)

Vic Hays
08-04-2011, 16:16
I get it -- you're using a fallacy of relevance here.

Major premise: The Roman religion had a "college of Pontiffs" with a "pontifex maximus"
Minor premise: The Catholic Church calls the Pope "Pontifex Maximus"
False conclusion: The Catholic Church is a continuation of the Roman religion

I have not concluded that the Catholic Church is a continuation of the Roman Empire. It is a hybrid of the old pagan religion with Christianity.
Conclusion: The Bible is the only trustworthy standard of faith.

Schabesbert
08-04-2011, 16:22
I tend to agree. It would seem quite odd to come into a new language and eschew its vocabulary. To paraphrase myself: It's difficult to translate into Latin and avoid Latin.

If I were bringing the Church into English-speaking territory, why would I come up with a new name for "Chief Priest" when "Chief Priest" is available.

Exactly.

Vic doesn't claim that, since the Jews had a "priesthood," and the Egyptions and Babylonians, etc., had a "priesthood," that the Jewish beliefs are somehow based on their religions.

The Apostles did this, too. For instance, Peter, presumably NOT to be criticized by Vic and Brasso for syncretism, usurped a ROMAN saying in Acts 4 when he said:
Ac 4:12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."

This actually comes from an inscription on the coins of the Roman Empire: "There is no other name under heaven by which men may be saved than that of Caesar Augustus."

So, the Catholic Church is doing just what her first Pope did. And yet, through a case of special pleading, it's OK for Peter to do but not OK for the Church to do (at least according to Vic, Brasso, et. al.).

Oh, and this "Pontifex Maximus" is NOT an official title of the Pope. Yes, it had been used unofficially in some literature, but not officially.





PS: I like your .sig!

Said to the 3 little pigs:
Ergo huffabo et puffabo et tuam domum inflabo!


"Quid latine dictum sit, altum"

Schabesbert
08-04-2011, 16:24
I have not concluded that the Catholic Church is a continuation of the Roman Empire. It is a hybrid of the old pagan religion with Christianity.
Ahh ... even though it has been shown to you that you are using fallacious arguments, you cling to your incorrect conclusions.

There are explanations for that type of thinking; none of them would be "rational thought."

Conclusion: The Bible is the only trustworthy standard of faith.
This despite the fact that the Bible itself says differently.

Going straight to "irrational thought" I see.

Ogreon
08-04-2011, 17:25
PS: I like your .sig!

Said to the 3 little pigs:


"Quid latine dictum sit, altum"

Sadly, I must admit that my Latin is creaky, self-taught, and largely dependent upon Lewis and Short (with a smattering of Wheelock). I do like the taste of it and eat what I can.

Sheepishly, I must admit that if I met the Pope, the line is probably what I would say to him. I hope that he would get a chuckle out of it, those Germans can be a tad strict.

Vic Hays
08-04-2011, 18:21
Ahh ... even though it has been shown to you that you are using fallacious arguments, you cling to your incorrect conclusions.

There are explanations for that type of thinking; none of them would be "rational thought."


This despite the fact that the Bible itself says differently.

Going straight to "irrational thought" I see.

No thanks Bert, I think i will stay with the foundation of Jesus and His Word.

Matthew 7:24-25 "Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock.

Schabesbert
08-05-2011, 08:28
No thanks Bert, I think i will stay with the foundation of Jesus and His Word.
You "stay with" Jesus --- by disobeying Him????

Interesting concept, Vic.

Matthew 7:24-25 "Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock.
And, who is that "wise man" and builder? Is it not Jesus?


So, Vic, are you now aware that your arguments were fallacious? Or are you just going to deny that fact, without any coherent response? [I think I know which answer I'd bet on!]

Roering
08-05-2011, 11:15
There was one in 2010 . I don't know the numbers.

10,000...100,000....1,000,000

You must have an idea. After all, these are the people determining your faith practices.

Vic Hays
08-05-2011, 14:07
10,000...100,000....1,000,000

You must have an idea. After all, these are the people determining your faith practices.

Actually the Bible determines my faith practices. These representatives help with governing the Church.

Just like your church. I remember the time when Catholics were debating communion in the hand or can a priest be married or the Latin mass.

Various things are not spelled out plainly in the Bible, so the General Conference in Session debates these things.

You may think that we have too much freedom. There is freedom in knowing and following the Truth.

John 8:31-32 .................................... "If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

Schabesbert
08-05-2011, 14:49
BTT

No thanks Bert, I think i will stay with the foundation of Jesus and His Word.
You "stay with" Jesus --- by disobeying Him????

Interesting concept, Vic.

Matthew 7:24-25 "Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock.
And, who is that "wise man" and builder? Is it not Jesus?


So, Vic, are you now aware that your arguments were fallacious? Or are you just going to deny that fact, without any coherent response? [I think I know which answer I'd bet on!]

Vic Hays
08-07-2011, 07:30
BTT


You "stay with" Jesus --- by disobeying Him????

Interesting concept, Vic.


And, who is that "wise man" and builder? Is it not Jesus?


So, Vic, are you now aware that your arguments were fallacious? Or are you just going to deny that fact, without any coherent response? [I think I know which answer I'd bet on!]

Unfortunately I do fall into sin from time to time. I repent that I am a sinner, Jesus has promised me help to overcome though. I just have to remember to keep the door open for only Him.

Revelation 3:19-22 "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zelous and repent. Behold, I satnd at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me. To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne." "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."

2. Your question about the text: who is that "wise man" and "builder"?

I will have to respectfully disagree with you and respectfully agree with Jesus. Please refer to the text again where Jesus answers that question. I will underline the correct answer so that you can also understand.



Matthew 7:24-25 "Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock.

The text says whoever hears these sayings and does them is the wise man and builder.

Thank you for the questions and blessings to you as you study God's Holy Bible.:wavey:

Schabesbert
08-07-2011, 23:17
Unfortunately I do fall into sin from time to time. I repent that I am a sinner, Jesus has promised me help to overcome though. I just have to remember to keep the door open for only Him.
Vic, you are disobeying Him by disobeying those to whom He gave Authority:

Lu 10:16 "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me."

1Th 5:12 But we beseech you, brethren, to respect those who labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you,

Heb 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.

2. Your question about the text: who is that "wise man" and "builder"?

I will have to respectfully disagree with you and respectfully agree with Jesus. Please refer to the text again where Jesus answers that question. I will underline the correct answer so that you can also understand.



Matthew 7:24-25 "Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock.

The text says whoever hears these sayings and does them is the wise man and builder.

So, your claim then is that Jesus is telling us to do something, but has done something contrary to His admonition? Seriously?

Vic Hays
08-08-2011, 14:20
[QUOTE=Schabesbert;17745453]Vic, you are disobeying Him by disobeying those to whom He gave Authority:

QUOTE]

Jesus has all authority. Following leaders who clearly contradict Jesus is not disobeying Jesus.

Why are you so much opposed to me building my Home on Jesus words? What do you have against Jesus?

Exodus 23:1-2 "You shall not cuirculate a false report. Do not put your hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness. You shall not follow a crowd to do evil; nor shall you testify in a dispute so as to turn aside after many to pervert justice."

Roering
08-08-2011, 16:16
[QUOTE=Schabesbert;17745453]Vic, you are disobeying Him by disobeying those to whom He gave Authority:

QUOTE]

Jesus has all authority. Following leaders who clearly contradict Jesus is not disobeying Jesus.
"

See the end of MT. The last paragraph is sometimes titled "The great commission"

Yes Jesus has all authority. Including the authority to commission people here on earth to perform certain tasks....such as those at the end of Matthew.

This is where the difference lies between us. It's small, but there you have it. I don't expect we will see eye to eye on this one. I'm ok with that.

Schabesbert
08-08-2011, 17:06
Vic, you are disobeying Him by disobeying those to whom He gave Authority:



Jesus has all authority.
Yes, but you deny Him the authority to pass on that authority, even though scripture clearly states that this has happened.

Following leaders who clearly contradict Jesus is not disobeying Jesus.
Refusing to follow those whom He has placed "over you in the faith" IS clearly disobeying Jesus. Doing so because they contradict YOUR OPINION of what Jesus meant does not exonerate you of this FACT.

Why are you so much opposed to me building my Home on Jesus words?
You insist that following Jesus necessarily entails disobeying Him. You insist that following scripture (alone) means that you should oppose what scripture says. I'm just pointing out your inconsistency, intellectual dishonesty, and hypocrisy.

Vic Hays
08-08-2011, 18:33
[QUOTE=Vic Hays;17747865]

See the end of MT. The last paragraph is sometimes titled "The great commission"

Yes Jesus has all authority. Including the authority to commission people here on earth to perform certain tasks....such as those at the end of Matthew.

This is where the difference lies between us. It's small, but there you have it. I don't expect we will see eye to eye on this one. I'm ok with that.

There is a big difference between teaching what Jesus taught and claiming all authority in heaven and earth.

These claims of authority even go against what Jesus taught about authority.

Matthew 22:25-26 ............. "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authoritynover them, Yet it shall not be so among you"...........................................................

Admittedly you claim your Church is founded upon Peter. I claim my Church is founded upon Jesus Christ. Continually you sing the praises of following someone other than Jesus. Continually you claim continuing inspiration that contradicts the Bible. I think the safer route is to follow Jesus and His words.

juggy4711
08-08-2011, 20:05
Interesting discussion.

I think that every single tele-evangelist on earth is a false prophet. I hope that every single one of them rots in Hell for an eternity for using religion to lie to and steal from unsophisticated, trusting people.

Word. If someone claims to be a prophet there's a 99.99999999999% chance they are false prophet.

[QUOTE=achysklic;17674832]Who is delusional here? You are still justifying yourself.

I had no idea about SDA or Ellen White prior to this thread. I hate to break it to you but anyone that believes they know what Jesus has been doing since 1844AD isn't right in the head.

Not skewed at all. The reasons are based on Torah which is not "skewed and prejudice" Only you don't like the answer so you choose to call it so. Or that we Jews don't understand our own books and some Gentiles who neither understand them nor can read them can come along 1800 years later to tell us where "we got it wrong" :upeyes:

I don't get this either. It takes a lot of audacity to tell a tradition that old they've been doing it wrong. Besides when I read the OT and the NT they just don't seem to jive.

OT - Discourage conversion and a gentile need only follow 7 rules to be in good grace.

NT - Actively prosthelytize and must accept a human that claimed to be the son of God as savior or go to hell.

Those can't be the same God. I'll take the OT version thanks.

Vic Hays
08-08-2011, 22:56
Interesting discussion.

I had no idea about SDA or Ellen White prior to this thread. I hate to break it to you but anyone that believes they know what Jesus has been doing since 1844AD isn't right in the head.



You shouldn't just dismiss something without a genuine investigation.

http://www.whiteestate.org/search/search.asp

Amos 3:7 Surely the Lord God does nothing, unless He reveals His secret to His servants the prophets.

Testimonies for the Church Volume 9, Page 12
“Justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter.” Isaiah 59:14. In the great cities there are multitudes living in poverty and wretchedness, well-nigh destitute of food, shelter, and clothing; while in the same cities are those who have more than heart could wish, who live luxuriously, spending their money on richly furnished houses, on personal adornment, or worse still, upon the gratification of sensual appetites, upon liquor, tobacco, and other things that destroy the powers of the brain, unbalance the mind, and debase the soul. The cries of starving humanity are coming up before God, while by every species of oppression and extortion men are piling up colossal fortunes.

On one occasion, when in New York City, I was in the night season called upon to behold buildings rising story after story toward heaven. These buildings were warranted to be fireproof, and they were erected to glorify their owners and builders. Higher and still higher these buildings rose, and in them the most costly material was used. Those to whom these buildings belonged were not asking themselves: “How can we best glorify God?” The Lord was not in their thoughts.

I thought: “Oh, that those who are thus investing their means could see their course as God sees it! They are piling up magnificent buildings, but how foolish in the sight of the Ruler of the universe is their planning and devising. They are not studying with all the powers of heart and mind how they may glorify God. They have lost sight of this, the first duty of man.”

As these lofty buildings went up, the owners rejoiced with ambitious pride that they had money to use in gratifying self and provoking the envy of their neighbors. Much of the money that they thus invested had been obtained through exaction, through grinding down the poor. They forgot that in heaven an account of every business transaction is kept; every unjust deal, every fraudulent act, is there recorded. The time is coming when in their fraud and insolence men will reach a point that the Lord will not permit them to pass, and they will learn that there is a limit to the forbearance of Jehovah.

The scene that next passed before me was an alarm of fire. Men looked at the lofty and supposedly fire-proof buildings and said: “They are perfectly safe.” But these buildings were consumed as if made of pitch. The fire engines could do nothing to stay the destruction. The firemen were unable to operate the engines.

I am instructed that when the Lord’s time comes, should no change have taken place in the hearts of proud, ambitious human beings, men will find that the hand that had been strong to save will be strong to destroy. No earthly power can stay the hand of God. No material can be used in the erection of buildings that will preserve them from destruction when God’s appointed time comes to send retribution on men for their disregard of His law and for their selfish ambition.

There are not many, even among educators and statesmen, who comprehend the causes that underlie the present state of society. Those who hold the reins of government are not able to solve the problem of moral corruption, poverty, pauperism, and increasing crime. They are struggling in vain to place business operations on a more secure basis. If men would give more heed to the teaching of God’s word, they would find a solution of the problems that perplex them.

Schabesbert
08-09-2011, 08:59
These claims of authority even go against what Jesus taught about authority.

Matthew 22:25-26 ............. "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authoritynover them, Yet it shall not be so among you"...........................................................
You keep using this quote for this purpose, I keep telling you why this doesn't support your premise, and you ignore the point and blithely make the same mistake a while later.

Your quote involves Jesus' instructions to His disciples about how they are to handle the Authority that He is about to give them. In order for them to handle the Authority justly (without "lord[ing] it over" others), they need to have been given Authority. So this proves just the opposite of what it is you posit.


Admittedly you claim your Church is founded upon Peter. I claim my Church is founded upon Jesus Christ.
No, JESUS claims that He founded His Church upon Peter. YOU claim that your church is founded upon Jesus Christ.

It comes down to whose claim I am to believe: yours, of Jesus'.

rgregoryb
08-09-2011, 09:42
I sell exploding prayer mats, my prophets are skyrocketing.....

Vic Hays
08-09-2011, 14:22
No, JESUS claims that He founded His Church upon Peter. YOU claim that your church is founded upon Jesus Christ.

.

This is an interpretation and an assumption on your part.

This interpretation did not even get promoted until the fourth century.

The Greek Orthodox Church does not agree with it either and it was part of the reason for breaking off with the Roman Catholic Church.

None of the Protestant Churches agree with it either.
Promoting human authority above the authority of Christ is not very Christian.

Schabesbert
08-09-2011, 14:37
This is an interpretation and an assumption on your part.
It is the plain meaning of the text. Even many very respected protestant scholars agree.

This interpretation did not even get promoted until the fourth century.
That's not true. Tertullian, Clement, Origen, for example, all in the very early 200s, wrote about this.

They agreed on THIS point hundreds of years before they agreed on which books belong in the corpus of inspired scripture.

Vic, where do you get your (mis-)information?

The Greek Orthodox Church does not agree with it either and it was part of the reason for breaking off with the Roman Catholic Church.
I'd ask for a citation, but I'm pretty sure that you would just ignrore me, since you don't have one.

None of the Protestant Churches agree with it either.
One of the many things about which they are wrong, and in conflict with their most respected scholars, and in conflict with their founders.

Promoting human authority above the authority of Christ is not very Christian.
Right, that's why we don't do that. Please, don't try to set up a very deceptive strawman to try to bolster your argument.

We promote Church Authority precisely BECAUSE that's what Christ commanded (something you're disobeying, as I've shown in the scripture quotes above, which you've not responded to I might add).

Vic Hays
08-09-2011, 15:16
It is the plain meaning of the text. Even many very respected protestant scholars agree.

We promote Church Authority precisely BECAUSE that's what Christ commanded (something you're disobeying, as I've shown in the scripture quotes above, which you've not responded to I might add).


http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/peterpope.html

"The Myth of Petrine Papacy
The Roman Catholic Church claims that Peter was the first pope and that he was appointed to that post by Jesus himself. This myth carry with it three implicit suggestions. The first is that Jesus actually appointed Peter to be the head of the Christian church. The second is that Peter became the bishop of Rome (the original title of the Pope). And third is that the supremacy of this title was recognized, from the earliest times, by the entire church by virtue of the above two points.
Yet all three suggestions are demonstrably false.


•There are two passages showing Peter's commissioning by Jesus-both are unhistorical:
◦The passage in Matthew is not supported by similar passages in Mark and Luke and contains internal contradictions and anachronisms
◦The passage in John is placed in a fictional (post-resurrection) setting and is a late addition to the gospel.
•Peter could not have been the first pope (or first bishop of Rome) because:
◦Some New Testament passages and early church tradition point to James as the leader of the early church
◦The tradition of Peter being the first Bishop of Rome only surfaced in the fourth century
◦The hierarchy of the early church could not have produced a first pope
•The supremacy of the Roman church was not recognized from the earliest of times and it achieved it's prominent position mainly through skilful political maneuvering and forgery.
◦Other major centers of Christianity never accepted the supremacy of Rome
◦The supremacy of Rome arose due to some skilful political maneuvering of the later popes and some contingent historical circumstances.
◦Some of the popes never "

Schabesbert
08-09-2011, 15:49
http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/peterpope.html

"The Myth of Petrina Papacy
The Roman Catholic Church claims that Peter was the first pope and that he was appointed to that post by Jesus himself. This myth carry with it three implicit suggestions. The first is that Jesus actually appointed Peter to be the head of the Christian church. The second is that Peter became the bishop of Rome (the original title of the Pope). And third is that the supremacy of this title was recognized, from the earliest times, by the entire church by virtue of the above two points.
Yet all three suggestions are demonstrably false.
Interesting. If you're right, then Christ had abandoned His Church for 1500 years or more.

Personally, I think Christ kept His word.

•There are two passages showing Peter's commissioning by Jesus-both are unhistorical:
◦The passage in Matthew is not supported by similar passages in Mark and Luke and contains internal contradictions and anachronisms
◦The passage in John is placed in a fictional (post-resurrection) setting and is a late addition to the gospel.
Oh, so your contention, Vic, is that scripture is wrong.
Got it.

I don't think so.

•Peter could not have been the first pope (or first bishop of Rome) because:
◦Some New Testament passages and early church tradition point to James as the leader of the early church
No, they don't. Not if correctly understood.

And besides, this would be pitting scripture against scripture. WE don't do that; we harmonize all of scripture.

◦The tradition of Peter being the first Bishop of Rome only surfaced in the fourth century
Flat out wrong.

(Aside from the fact that the decision about such very important matters as which books actually constitute sacred scripture, and what is Jesus' actual nature -- fully man, fully God, or both; one will or two; etc.)

Besides recent archaeological finds showing that Peter is indeed buried in Rome, we have writings of Church Fathers that show this assertion to be false. Here are but a few:

Peter's Roman Residency (http://www.catholic.com/library/Peter_Roman_Residency.asp)
Ignatius of Antioch



"Not as Peter and Paul did, do I command you [Romans]. They were apostles, and I am a convict" (Letter to the Romans 4:3 [A.D. 110]).


Dionysius of Corinth



"You [Pope Soter] have also, by your very admonition, brought together the planting that was made by Peter and Paul at Rome and at Corinth; for both of them alike planted in our Corinth and taught us; and both alike, teaching similarly in Italy, suffered martyrdom at the same time" (Letter to Pope Soter [A.D. 170], in Eusebius, History of the Church 2:25:8).


Irenaeus



"Matthew also issued among the Hebrews a written Gospel in their own language, while Peter and Paul were evangelizing in Rome and laying the foundation of the Church" (Against Heresies, 3, 1:1 [A.D. 189]).

"But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the succession of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church [of Rome], because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition" (ibid., 3, 3, 2).

"The blessed apostles [Peter and Paul], having founded and built up the church [of Rome], they handed over the office of the episcopate to Linus. Paul makes mention of this Linus in the letter to Timothy [2 Tim. 4:21]. To him succeeded Anacletus, and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was chosen for the episcopate. He had seen the blessed apostles and was acquainted with them. It might be said that he still heard the echoes of the preaching of the apostles and had their traditions before his eyes. And not only he, for there were many still remaining who had been instructed by the apostles. In the time of Clement, no small dissension having arisen among the brethren in Corinth, the church in Rome sent a very strong letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace and renewing their faith. ... To this Clement, Evaristus succeeded . . . and now, in the twelfth place after the apostles, the lot of the episcopate [of Rome] has fallen to Eleutherius. In this order, and by the teaching of the apostles handed down in the Church, the preaching of the truth has come down to us" (ibid., 3, 3, 3).


Gaius



"It is recorded that Paul was beheaded in Rome itself, and Peter, likewise, was crucified, during the reign [of the Emperor Nero]. The account is confirmed by the names of Peter and Paul over the cemeteries there, which remain to the present time. And it is confirmed also by a stalwart man of the Church, Gaius by name, who lived in the time of Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome. This Gaius, in a written disputation with Proclus, the leader of the sect of Cataphrygians, says this of the places in which the remains of the aforementioned apostles were deposited: ‘I can point out the trophies of the apostles. For if you are willing to go to the Vatican or to the Ostian Way, you will find the trophies of those who founded this Church’" (Disputation with Proclus [A.D. 198] in Eusebius, Church History 2:25:5).


Clement of Alexandria



"The circumstances which occasioned . . . [the writing] of Mark were these: When Peter preached the Word publicly at Rome and declared the gospel by the Spirit, many who were present requested that Mark, who had been a long time his follower and who remembered his sayings, should write down what had been proclaimed" (Sketches [A.D. 200], in a fragment from Eusebius, History of the Church, 6, 14:1).


Tertullian



"But if you are near Italy, you have Rome, where authority is at hand for us too. What a happy church that is, on which the apostles poured out their whole doctrine with their blood; where Peter had a passion like that of the Lord, where Paul was crowned with the death of John [the Baptist, by being beheaded]" (Demurrer Against the Heretics 36 [A.D. 200]).

"[T]his is the way in which the apostolic churches transmit their lists: like the church of the Smyrneans, which records that Polycarp was placed there by John, like the church of the Romans, where Clement was ordained by Peter" (ibid., 32:2).

"Let us see what milk the Corinthians drained from Paul; against what standard the Galatians were measured for correction; what the Philippians, Thessalonians, and Ephesians read; what even the nearby Romans sound forth, to whom both Peter and Paul bequeathed the gospel and even sealed it with their blood" (Against Marcion 4, 5:1 [A.D. 210]).


Apparently he, like you in your post above, thinks that the year 200 marked the beginning of the 4th century.

Again, Vic, where do you get your (mis-)information, and aren't you tired of being so wrong?


•The supremacy of the Roman church was not recognized from the earliest of times and it achieved it's prominent position mainly through skilful political maneuvering and forgery.
Pure assertion without any backup.

Vic, tell me then, how is it that the Bishop of Rome, Pope St. Clement I, was called upon and claimed authority to mediate in the affairs of the Church of Corinth in the year 80???

Paul7
08-09-2011, 16:05
No, JESUS claims that He founded His Church upon Peter.

Bert, that is true, but Peter has been dead for a long time. Where in Scripture does it say that statement to Peter was also intended for future Popes until the end of time?

I think Christ's church is built by ALL faithful Christians. I think all Jesus was saying to Peter was that he would be a key figure in the launching of the Christian church. Perhaps He was building Peter's confidence after his denials of Jesus. The majority of worldwide Christians do not agree with you on this.

Where does it say the Bishop of Rome was to have authority over the church?

Peter nowhere claims supremacy over the other apostles. Nowhere in his writings (1 and 2 Peter) did the Apostle Peter claim any special role, authority, or power over the church. Nowhere in Scripture does Peter, or any other apostle, state that their apostolic authority would be passed on to successors.

Schabesbert
08-09-2011, 17:20
Bert, that is true, but Peter has been dead for a long time. Where in Scripture does it say that statement to Peter was also intended for future Popes until the end of time?
OK, but that's a separate albeit related issue: Apostolic Succession, specifically Petrine succession.

Let's first agree that Peter was the primary Apostle (as scripture says, see for instance Matthew 10:2).

I think Christ's church is built by ALL faithful Christians.
Sure, in one sense. But in a very important, legitimate sense (as voiced by the Son Himself), the Church was built on Peter.

I think all Jesus was saying to Peter was that he would be a key figure in the launching of the Christian church. Perhaps He was building Peter's confidence after his denials of Jesus.
This promise was given well before the denials.

The majority of worldwide Christians do not agree with you on this.
Not true, since the majority of worldwide Christians are indeed Catholics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_by_number_of_members).
Catholicism - 1.2 billion
Protestantism - 670 million

All of the thousands of protestant denominations together don't add up in membership to more than 60% of the Catholic Church's.


Where does it say the Bishop of Rome was to have authority over the church?
Again, this is another question, that I'd love to get into. If you're interested, I will have to make some time later to address this.

Peter nowhere claims supremacy over the other apostles.
See, you're backsliding now an making claims that he isn't the "protos" as scripture says.

Nowhere in his writings (1 and 2 Peter) did the Apostle Peter claim any special role, authority, or power over the church.
Yes, he learned humility well. It would be surprising if he were to do so in a letter extolling the virtue of humility.

Nowhere in Scripture does Peter, or any other apostle, state that their apostolic authority would be passed on to successors.
No, but they considered the office of Judas to be vacant and in need of a successor in Acts 1.

Paul7
08-09-2011, 17:53
Not true, since the majority of worldwide Christians are indeed Catholics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_by_number_of_members).
Catholicism - 1.2 billion
Protestantism - 670 million

Where are the Orthodox on your list? They certainly don't believe in the primacy of the Bishop of Rome.

All of the thousands of protestant denominations together don't add up in membership to more than 60% of the Catholic Church's.

Sources I've seen say about half of worldwide Christians are Catholic, but I'll retract my statement and say very many worldwide Christians reject the idea of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome.

See, you're backsliding now an making claims that he isn't the "protos" as scripture says.

No, Jesus' statement 'upon this rock' doesn't necessarily infer the primacy of Peter over the other Apostles. Put it this way, if Jesus had said Mother Theresa was the rock upon which He would build the church in Calcutta, that doesn't mean she would have authority over other Catholics in the area. You can be a rock while being a servant.

We're probably never going to agree on this, and I don't consider it an essential the faith. For the record, I admire John Paul II and his successor.

Schabesbert
08-09-2011, 19:27
No, Jesus' statement 'upon this rock' doesn't necessarily infer the primacy of Peter over the other Apostles.
Peter is invariably called or alluded to as the leader or spokesman of the Apostles. There are many, many instances, but I'll offer one for now: Matthew 10:2-4.

Mt 10:2 The names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;

"The first, [protos] Simon, [Simon] who [ho] is called [lego] Peter, [Petros] ..."

Strongs defines protos thus:
4413. prwtov protos, pro'-tos
contracted superlative of 4253; foremost (in time, place, order or importance):--before, beginning, best, chief(-est), first (of all), former.

Since it refers to pro, I'll include that definition:
4253. pro pro, pro
a primary preposition; "fore", i.e. in front of, prior (figuratively, superior) to:--above, ago, before, or ever. In the comparative, it retains the same significations.

Now, answer me this: first in what? Is it
1. in time
- no, since he was NOT the eldest Apostle
2. place
- physical place is irrelevant in this context
3. order
- no, since he was NOT the first Apostle selected

All that's left is:
4. importance

Put it this way, if Jesus had said Mother Theresa was the rock upon which He would build the church in Calcutta
That construct doesn't fit with Christ's words. He said that He would build His Church (note: singular in the Greek) on Peter. No qualifications.

You can be a rock while being a servant.
Yes. That is one of the official titles of the Pope:
Servus Servorum Dei (Servant of the Servants of God).

Paul7
08-09-2011, 19:50
Peter is invariably called or alluded to as the leader or spokesman of the Apostles. There are many, many instances, but I'll offer one for now: Matthew 10:2-4.

Mt 10:2 The names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;

"The first, [protos] Simon, [Simon] who [ho] is called [lego] Peter, [Petros] ..."

Strongs defines protos thus:
4413. prwtov protos, pro'-tos
contracted superlative of 4253; foremost (in time, place, order or importance):--before, beginning, best, chief(-est), first (of all), former.

Since it refers to pro, I'll include that definition:
4253. pro pro, pro
a primary preposition; "fore", i.e. in front of, prior (figuratively, superior) to:--above, ago, before, or ever. In the comparative, it retains the same significations.

Now, answer me this: first in what? Is it
1. in time
- no, since he was NOT the eldest Apostle
2. place
- physical place is irrelevant in this context
3. order
- no, since he was NOT the first Apostle selected

All that's left is:
4. importance


That construct doesn't fit with Christ's words. He said that He would build His Church (note: singular in the Greek) on Peter. No qualifications.



OK, but what does that have to do with the present pope, or the pope 300 years from now?

Vic Hays
08-10-2011, 11:00
Apparently he, like you in your post above, thinks that the year 200 marked the beginning of the 4th century.

Again, Vic, where do you get your (mis-)information, and aren't you tired of being so wrong?

So you are admitting that the Peterine thing had its beginning in the year 200? That is not the beginning.

Jesus made it so simple. It is like the instructions to stay away from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Simple instruction.

Build your faith and Christian practice upon Jesus and His word.

Matthew 7:24 "Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock."

There is no quotation that says that Peter has authority over me.

The keys are the keys to the "kingdom of heaven" which has not yet come upon this earth and are indeed the words of Christ as can be seen in Matthew 7:24

Why the emphasis on authority? Jesus has all power and authority. We do not need authority. We have authority when we pray in Jesus name and it is within the will of God. I need not to ask in the name of Peter.

John 14:13-14 "And whatever you ask in My name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything in My name I will do it"

Schabesbert
08-10-2011, 12:02
So you are admitting that the Peterine thing had its beginning in the year 200? That is not the beginning.
No, I'm saying that we have written confirmation of that from the Early Church dating back to 200.

First, this is verifiable proof that your source doesn't have a clue, or is dishonest.

Second, this means that this was understood in the year 200.
Suppose that, 2,000 years from now, we want to investigate what the 2nd amendment meant. Suppose further that many or all of the tertiary writings had disappeared, and all we had left were the "official" governmental documents. That would NOT mean that it wasn't until 2008 that the 2nd amendment applied to individuals.

Jesus made it so simple. It is like the instructions to stay away from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Simple instruction.
Yet, as I've shown, your only scriptural evidence against my contention is actually evidence FOR it.

Build your faith and Christian practice upon Jesus and His word.

Matthew 7:24 "Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock."

There is no quotation that says that Peter has authority over me.
But there ARE quotations that say that SOMEONE has authority over you. And there ARE quotations that say that the Apostles were given authority from Christ. And there ARE quotations that show that Peter was the chief Apostolic spokesperson. And there ARE quotations that show that Peter was given a unique Authority (the Keys of the Kingdom), and a unique commission (Feed My lambs ... Tend My sheep ... Feed My sheep), and a unique role to play:

Lu 22:28 "You are those who have continued with me in my trials;
29 and I assign to you, as my Father assigned to me, a kingdom,
So, Jesus is putting the kingdom into the hands of the Apostles. They must have SOME kind of authority then, don't you think, Vic?

Or do you need to just ignore this statement from Christ's own lips as well?
Are you going to claim that this doesn't belong in scripture, too, as you did in your citation above (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=17753117&postcount=167)?

30 that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
31 "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you {plural, meaning all the Apostles}, that he might sift you like wheat,
32 but I have prayed for you {SINGULAR, meaning PETER ALONE} that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren."


The keys are the keys to the "kingdom of heaven" which has not yet come upon this earth and are indeed the words of Christ as can be seen in Matthew 7:24
See Luke 22:29 above.

Why the emphasis on authority?
You'll need to ask Jesus that, since He assigned the Authority to His followers, who assigned it to their successors.

Jesus has all power and authority. We do not need authority.
The first part is true; the second is false. You do not HAVE divinely-granted authority, and thus you need to make such a claim.


We have authority when we pray in Jesus name and it is within the will of God. I need not to ask in the name of Peter.
Vic, can't we dispense with the dishonest strawmen?


John 14:13-14 "And whatever you ask in My name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything in My name I will do it"
Vic, to whom was Jesus addressing this statement? (Hint: it occurred at the last supper.)

Don't you want to address all the corrections I made to your previous post (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=17753117&postcount=167)?

Schabesbert
08-10-2011, 12:04
OK, but what does that have to do with the present pope, or the pope 300 years from now?
And now we've circled back to my reply in post #169:
OK, but that's a separate albeit related issue: Apostolic Succession, specifically Petrine succession.

Let's first agree that Peter was the primary Apostle (as scripture says, see for instance Matthew 10:2).

Roering
08-10-2011, 12:34
I have to wonder if what is making the practice of Apostolic Succession so difficult to grasp because it is being seen through American eyes.

For us, in this country it is the people who choose who will have authority over us, not the other way around. It is a major paradigm shift to consider that Christ did not set up the Church to be a democracy.

Think of the first apostle that replaced Judas. Weren't the two candidates chosen by the eleven?

They were not chosen by the whole body of believers.

Could also explain why there has been oppression of Catholics throughout American history. The system in which the Church operates is not fitting of how our government functions. In that way you could say that the Church is un-American.

Paul7
08-10-2011, 12:41
I have to wonder if what is making the practice of Apostolic Succession so difficult to grasp because it is being seen through American eyes.

For us, in this country it is the people who choose who will have authority over us, not the other way around. It is a major paradigm shift to consider that Christ did not set up the Church to be a democracy.

Yes, unfortunately parts of American Christianity see fit to discard the parts of the Bible that aren't politically correct.

Vic Hays
08-10-2011, 16:03
Could also explain why there has been oppression of Catholics throughout American history. The system in which the Church operates is not fitting of how our government functions. In that way you could say that the Church is un-American.

You are correct. The Catholic system and the USA system of liberty are not compatible and it was thought important enough to include freedom of religion in the First Amendment. The Protestants were looking for a country where they could practice their religion without interference. At times Catholicism was even banned. Of course banning a religion is not the freedom of religion that we got in the First Amendment and it is ironic to note that Freedom of Religion was first enacted in Maryland founded by the "Catholic Lord Baltimore".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_the_United_States

"Colonial precedent

Freedom of religion was first applied as a principle of government in the founding of the colony of Maryland, founded by the Catholic Lord Baltimore, in 1634.[2] Fifteen years later (1649), the first enactment of religious liberty, the Maryland Toleration Act, drafted by Lord Baltimore, provided: "No person or persons...shall from henceforth be any waies troubled, molested or discountenanced for or in respect of his or her religion nor in the free exercise thereof." The Maryland Toleration Act was repealed with the assistance of Protestant assemblymen and a new law barring Catholics from openly practicing their religion was passed.[3] In 1657, Lord Baltimore regained control after making a deal with the colony's Protestants, and in 1658 the Act was again passed by the colonial assembly. This time, it would last more than thirty years, until 1692,[4] when after Maryland's Protestant Revolution of 1689, freedom of religion was again rescinded.[2][5] In addition in 1704, an Act was passed "to prevent the growth of Popery in this Province", preventing Catholics from holding political office.[5] Full religious toleration would not be restored in Maryland until the American Revolution, when Maryland's Charles Carroll of Carrollton signed the American Declaration of Independence."

Vic Hays
08-11-2011, 19:25
A false propphet is one who pretends to speak for God, but does not.

They can appear as apostles of God. This occured very early in the formation of the Christian Church as Paul wrote:

II Corinthians 11:12-15 But what I do, I will also continue to do, that I may cut off the opportunity from those who desire an opportunity to be regarded just as we are in the things of which they boast. For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no wonder! For satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.

Schabesbert
08-12-2011, 16:28
BTT
So you are admitting that the Peterine thing had its beginning in the year 200? That is not the beginning.
No, I'm saying that we have written confirmation of that from the Early Church dating back to 200.

First, this is verifiable proof that your source doesn't have a clue, or is dishonest.

Second, this means that this was understood in the year 200.
Suppose that, 2,000 years from now, we want to investigate what the 2nd amendment meant. Suppose further that many or all of the tertiary writings had disappeared, and all we had left were the "official" governmental documents. That would NOT mean that it wasn't until 2008 that the 2nd amendment applied to individuals.

Modified to add: We don't have any indication of the phrase "accept Christ as your 'Personal Lord & Savior'" until, well, very recently. Does that mean that this was never believed until very recently?

Jesus made it so simple. It is like the instructions to stay away from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Simple instruction.
Yet, as I've shown, your only scriptural evidence against my contention is actually evidence FOR it.

Build your faith and Christian practice upon Jesus and His word.

Matthew 7:24 "Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock."

There is no quotation that says that Peter has authority over me.
But there ARE quotations that say that SOMEONE has authority over you. And there ARE quotations that say that the Apostles were given authority from Christ. And there ARE quotations that show that Peter was the chief Apostolic spokesperson. And there ARE quotations that show that Peter was given a unique Authority (the Keys of the Kingdom), and a unique commission (Feed My lambs ... Tend My sheep ... Feed My sheep), and a unique role to play:

Lu 22:28 "You are those who have continued with me in my trials;
29 and I assign to you, as my Father assigned to me, a kingdom,
So, Jesus is putting the kingdom into the hands of the Apostles. They must have SOME kind of authority then, don't you think, Vic?

Or do you need to just ignore this statement from Christ's own lips as well?
Are you going to claim that this doesn't belong in scripture, too, as you did in your citation above (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=17753117&postcount=167)?

30 that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
31 "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you {plural, meaning all the Apostles}, that he might sift you like wheat,
32 but I have prayed for you {SINGULAR, meaning PETER ALONE} that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren."


The keys are the keys to the "kingdom of heaven" which has not yet come upon this earth and are indeed the words of Christ as can be seen in Matthew 7:24
See Luke 22:29 above.

Why the emphasis on authority?
You'll need to ask Jesus that, since He assigned the Authority to His followers, who assigned it to their successors.

Jesus has all power and authority. We do not need authority.
The first part is true; the second is false. You do not HAVE divinely-granted authority, and thus you need to make such a claim.


We have authority when we pray in Jesus name and it is within the will of God. I need not to ask in the name of Peter.
Vic, can't we dispense with the dishonest strawmen?


John 14:13-14 "And whatever you ask in My name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything in My name I will do it"
Vic, to whom was Jesus addressing this statement? (Hint: it occurred at the last supper.)

Don't you want to address all the corrections I made to your previous post (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=17753117&postcount=167)?

Vic Hays
08-12-2011, 22:36
[QUOTE=Schabesbert;17767322]

But there ARE quotations that say that SOMEONE has authority over you. And there ARE quotations that say that the Apostles were given authority from Christ. And there ARE quotations that show that Peter was the chief Apostolic spokesperson. And there ARE quotations that show that Peter was given a unique Authority (the Keys of the Kingdom), and a unique commission (Feed My lambs ... Tend My sheep ... Feed My sheep), and a unique role to play:

QUOTE]

Claims of authority mean nothing. Paul wrote that some were trying to claim apostolic authority in his day. This is not what Jesus said to look for in a prophet.

You do claim continuing inspiration don't you?

Schabesbert
08-13-2011, 07:26
But there ARE quotations that say that SOMEONE has authority over you. And there ARE quotations that say that the Apostles were given authority from Christ. And there ARE quotations that show that Peter was the chief Apostolic spokesperson. And there ARE quotations that show that Peter was given a unique Authority (the Keys of the Kingdom), and a unique commission (Feed My lambs ... Tend My sheep ... Feed My sheep), and a unique role to play:



Claims of authority mean nothing.
These are scriptural "claims." They many mean nothing to you, but Catholics follow scripture.

Paul wrote that some were trying to claim apostolic authority in his day.
Yes. There are those always who would try to usurp authority.
How do we know who has Authority? Those who have Authority have been given it by legitimate Apostolic Succession.

You do claim continuing inspiration don't you?
No, we don't.

That would be the claim of those following Ellen G. White, for example.

Vic Hays
08-13-2011, 08:06
These are scriptural "claims." They many mean nothing to you, but Catholics follow scripture.



:rofl::rofl::rofl:

First you say the RCC is above scripture and then you say they follow scripture. Spin, spin , spin. Do you even know which way is up?


Jesus said the wise person who builds on the Rock will judge them by their fruits.

Catholics do claim the prophetic gift even though you said the opposite which is a falsehood.

Matthew 7:15-16 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheeps clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles?"

Is 1260 years of oppression and inquisition enough to judge?

Kingarthurhk
08-13-2011, 08:26
I have to wonder if what is making the practice of Apostolic Succession so difficult to grasp because it is being seen through American eyes.

For us, in this country it is the people who choose who will have authority over us, not the other way around. It is a major paradigm shift to consider that Christ did not set up the Church to be a democracy.

Think of the first apostle that replaced Judas. Weren't the two candidates chosen by the eleven?

They were not chosen by the whole body of believers.

Could also explain why there has been oppression of Catholics throughout American history. The system in which the Church operates is not fitting of how our government functions. In that way you could say that the Church is un-American.

Odd. That seems to be in direct contradiction of:

Galatians 3:28-29, "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. <SUP id=en-NIV-29132 class=versenum>29</SUP> If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise."

James 2:1-7, " <SUP>1</SUP> My brothers and sisters, believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ must not show favoritism. <SUP id=en-NIV-30296 class=versenum>2</SUP> Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in filthy old clothes also comes in. <SUP id=en-NIV-30297 class=versenum>3</SUP> If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, “Here’s a good seat for you,” but say to the poor man, “You stand there” or “Sit on the floor by my feet,” <SUP id=en-NIV-30298 class=versenum>4</SUP> have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?
<SUP id=en-NIV-30299 class=versenum>5</SUP> Listen, my dear brothers and sisters: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him? <SUP id=en-NIV-30300 class=versenum>6</SUP> But you have dishonored the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? <SUP id=en-NIV-30301 class=versenum>7</SUP> Are they not the ones who are blaspheming the noble name of him to whom you belong?"

Acts 10:34-35, " <SUP>34</SUP> Then Peter began to speak: “I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism <SUP id=en-NIV-27295 class=versenum>35</SUP> but accepts from every nation the one who fears him and does what is right."

achysklic
08-13-2011, 08:27
A false propphet is one who pretends to speak for God, but does not.

They can appear as apostles of God.

It seems the one your church deems as their founder falls into this cat.

Actually Vic let's give the biblical explanation for what a false peophet is, and let's see how Ellem White measures up to it.

"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"
(Deuteronomy 18:22).


Are you afraid of Ellen White Vic?

iF NOT YOU ARE DISOBEYING GOD.

Kingarthurhk
08-13-2011, 08:38
It seems the one your church deems as their founder falls into this cat.

Actually Vic let's give the biblical explanation for what a false peophet is, and let's see how Ellem White measures up to it.

"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"
(Deuteronomy 18:22).


Are you afraid of Ellen White Vic?

iF NOT YOU ARE DISOBEYING GOD.

Interesting. Could you provide some examples rather than simple ad hominum toward, Vic? It is one thing to make the accusation, it is another to bring the evidence.

What evidence do you have?

achysklic
08-13-2011, 13:51
Interesting. Could you provide some examples rather than simple ad hominum toward, Vic? It is one thing to make the accusation, it is another to bring the evidence.

What evidence do you have?


Evidence that Ellen White is a false prophet?

If that is what you are asking I think throughout this thread I provided alot of evidence.

If you would like more I can cite more.

Kingarthurhk
08-13-2011, 13:58
Evidence that Ellen White is a false prophet?

If that is what you are asking I think throughout this thread I provided alot of evidence.

If you would like more I can cite more.

I must have missed those while I was out. I just saw the above post you had made, and thought to myself it is one thing to say a thing-it is another to present facts to support the thing that is said.

Vic Hays
08-14-2011, 04:31
It seems the one your church deems as their founder falls into this cat.

Actually Vic let's give the biblical explanation for what a false peophet is, and let's see how Ellem White measures up to it.

"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"
(Deuteronomy 18:22).


Are you afraid of Ellen White Vic?

iF NOT YOU ARE DISOBEYING GOD.

Achy

I have three questions for you.

1. Do you wish to be a false accuser?


2. Was Jonah a false prophet? He prophesied, "Yet forty days, and Ninevah shall be overthrown", Jonah 3:4. It did not happen.


3. How did Jesus say that prophets should be judged? Matthew 7:15-20

achysklic
08-14-2011, 07:22
Achy

I have three questions for you.

1. Do you wish to be a false accuser?


2. Was Jonah a false prophet? He prophesied, "Yet forty days, and Ninevah shall be overthrown", Jonah 3:4. It did not happen.


3. How did Jesus say that prophets should be judged? Matthew 7:15-20


Ok Vic I will answer your questions unlike you I do read everything you post and answer it.

1) I don't think I am a false accuser since I have proven Ellen White has made several false prophecies.

2)First of all, Jonah did not make a mistake; he said exactly what God told him to say (Jonah 3:1 (http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Jonah%203.1)).
Jonah’s prophecy was not in error, because implied in the prophecy was a condition under which the predicted judgment would not take place. The Ninevites clearly understood what Jonah meant — namely, that their city would be overthrown unless they repented (Jonah 3:5-9 (http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Jonah%203.5-9)). Since God spared Nineveh, obviously He meant the prophecy to be understood that way (Jonah 3:10 (http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Jonah%203.10)). Even Jonah understood it that way, since he admitted in prayer that he knew God wanted to show mercy to the Ninevites (Jonah 4:1-2 (http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Jonah%204.1-2)). So all of the parties involved — God, Jonah, and the Ninevites — understood that the prophecy was conditional.

3) So Vic since I have shown that Ellen White produced bad fruit are you going to throw her teachings in the fire?

Vic I am really appalled that you would compare EW with a true prophet or with anyone from the bible. This is wrong on your part and is something you really need to come to terms with in the future.

She was a fruit cake, would lived in a fairy tale, people who follow her teachings reject the true God of Israel!

Vic Hays
08-14-2011, 10:08
Ok Vic I will answer your questions unlike you I do read everything you post and answer it.

1) I don't think I am a false accuser since I have proven Ellen White has made several false prophecies.

2)First of all, Jonah did not make a mistake; he said exactly what God told him to say (Jonah 3:1 (http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Jonah%203.1)).
Jonah’s prophecy was not in error, because implied in the prophecy was a condition under which the predicted judgment would not take place. The Ninevites clearly understood what Jonah meant — namely, that their city would be overthrown unless they repented (Jonah 3:5-9 (http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Jonah%203.5-9)). Since God spared Nineveh, obviously He meant the prophecy to be understood that way (Jonah 3:10 (http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Jonah%203.10)). Even Jonah understood it that way, since he admitted in prayer that he knew God wanted to show mercy to the Ninevites (Jonah 4:1-2 (http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Jonah%204.1-2)). So all of the parties involved — God, Jonah, and the Ninevites — understood that the prophecy was conditional.

3) So Vic since I have shown that Ellen White produced bad fruit are you going to throw her teachings in the fire?

Vic I am really appalled that you would compare EW with a true prophet or with anyone from the bible. This is wrong on your part and is something you really need to come to terms with in the future.

She was a fruit cake, would lived in a fairy tale, people who follow her teachings reject the true God of Israel!


1. You admit that prophecies can be conditional so that prophecies can be made which do not come to pass. I might add that you cut and pasted this from biblia.com. without giving them credit as if it were your own thoughts.

2. Fruit is not just a prophecy that did not come to pass. You have to be specific in how you condemn her with your judgment. The fruit of her life is worldwide advancement of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, an increased interest and knowledge of the Bible, schools, hospitals, healthy people.

3. I pointed out to you that people claim that Ellen White made erroneous statements about scientific things like Jupiter. This was found to be completely false on your part, but you have no shame and could not admit that you made a mistake here.
Could you have found the statements where she made correct statements about scientific things like, "sugar clogs the system", and "tobacco is a slow insidious poison"? These statements were made back when science regarded tobacco as a medical treatment for respiratory disease and rich diets a normal thing.

achysklic
08-14-2011, 12:13
1. You admit that prophecies can be conditional so that prophecies can be made which do not come to pass. I might add that you cut and pasted this from biblia.com. without giving them credit as if it were your own thoughts.

2. Fruit is not just a prophecy that did not come to pass. You have to be specific in how you condemn her with your judgment. The fruit of her life is worldwide advancement of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, an increased interest and knowledge of the Bible, schools, hospitals, healthy people.

3. I pointed out to you that people claim that Ellen White made erroneous statements about scientific things like Jupiter. This was found to be completely false on your part, but you have no shame and could not admit that you made a mistake here.
Could you have found the statements where she made correct statements about scientific things like, "sugar clogs the system", and "tobacco is a slow insidious poison"? These statements were made back when science regarded tobacco as a medical treatment for respiratory disease and rich diets a normal thing.


Vic your order is mixed up you answered 2 and meant it to be 3. Anyways

You copy and paste from sda tracks all the time, who cares...

Look Vic I am going to copy and paste again should I give credit to Moses?

"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"
(Deuteronomy 18:22).


As I HAVE POINTED OUT Ellen White has made many false prophecies, go back through this thread Vic and actually read what I posted and just don't point out the Jupiter one.

She made many FALSE prophecies so according to Moses and God you should be afraid of HER, aND ACCORDING TO Jesus you should throw her teaching in the fire and flee from them.

Vic, why do you keep defending her?

If she is wrong 1 time the bible tells you what to do..Now go back and read all the things I posted she was wrong about and if you need more proof I will gladly provide more.

also it doesn't matter if she was correct 90% of the time the 10% she was wrong according to God makes her a false prophet.

Take a poll on here VIC IT'S NOT just me, ask if she according to Gods word is a false prophet, you will she how blind you are.

Satan uses people like her, he let just enough truth get out to hook people like you. This has always been the case.
Defend Jesus word not a crazy woman!

Vic Hays
08-14-2011, 14:24
[QUOTE=achysklic;17773891] So all of the parties involved — God, Jonah, and the Ninevites — understood that the prophecy was conditional.[QUOTE]



Do you understand the concept of conditional prophecy? I can see you posted about it with someone elses words.

If you do understand conditional prophecies then go back and reread what you posted. Almost all are conditional prophecies except for the one you posted that EG White never made about Jupiter.

achysklic
08-14-2011, 15:30
[QUOTE=achysklic;17773891] So all of the parties involved — God, Jonah, and the Ninevites — understood that the prophecy was conditional.[QUOTE]



Do you understand the concept of conditional prophecy? I can see you posted about it with someone elses words.

If you do understand conditional prophecies then go back and reread what you posted. Almost all are conditional prophecies except for the one you posted that EG White never made about Jupiter.

Again Vic, I ask why do you keep defending EW?

It really is cultish!

Why do you keep acting like all prophecies are conditional?

Jonah only repeated exactly what God had said. See the difference? I doubt you don't.

So let's see how conditional EW was ok Vic?

Did her prophecy of "colored people" come true? Ummm No!

"Slavery will again be revived in the Southern States; for the spirit of slavery still lives. Therefore it will not do for those who labor among the colored people to preach the truth as boldly and openly as they would be free to do in other places. Even Christ clothed His lessons in figures and parables to avoid the opposition of the Pharisees." (Spalding & Magan Collection, page 21 and 2 MR #153, page 300)

Ellen white:Satan, who is the father of lies, deceived Adam in a similar way, telling him that he need not obey God, that he would not die if he transgressed the law. Evangelism, p. 598

Bible:And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 1 Timothy 2:14


Ellen White:"The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty" (Letter 32, 1899, quoted in the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. 1129).


Vic, really you need to look outside of the adventist box and see God for as he really is. EW told many lies, You keep ignoring Gods word That if just one time a prophet makes a false claim they are a false prophet.

You keep side stepping defending her making excuses acting like all the prophecies in the Bible are conditional because the One that God himself told Jonah changed.

Vic, news flash I promise you God never used EW for anything, the god of this world however used her alot.

Vic Hays
08-14-2011, 23:02
[QUOTE=Vic Hays;17775441][QUOTE=achysklic;17773891] So all of the parties involved — God, Jonah, and the Ninevites — understood that the prophecy was conditional.

Again Vic, I ask why do you keep defending EW?

It really is cultish!

Why do you keep acting like all prophecies are conditional?

Jonah only repeated exactly what God had said. See the difference? I doubt you don't.

So let's see how conditional EW was ok Vic?

Did her prophecy of "colored people" come true? Ummm No!

"Slavery will again be revived in the Southern States; for the spirit of slavery still lives. Therefore it will not do for those who labor among the colored people to preach the truth as boldly and openly as they would be free to do in other places. Even Christ clothed His lessons in figures and parables to avoid the opposition of the Pharisees." (Spalding & Magan Collection, page 21 and 2 MR #153, page 300)

Ellen white:Satan, who is the father of lies, deceived Adam in a similar way, telling him that he need not obey God, that he would not die if he transgressed the law. Evangelism, p. 598

Bible:And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 1 Timothy 2:14


Ellen White:"The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty" (Letter 32, 1899, quoted in the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. 1129).


Vic, really you need to look outside of the adventist box and see God for as he really is. EW told many lies, You keep ignoring Gods word That if just one time a prophet makes a false claim they are a false prophet.

You keep side stepping defending her making excuses acting like all the prophecies in the Bible are conditional because the One that God himself told Jonah changed.

Vic, news flash I promise you God never used EW for anything, the god of this world however used her alot.


I dont see anything wrong with those quotes. Only a person desperately determined to discredit E G White would see anything wrong with them. Ellen White wrote about 100,000 pages. She always points to the Bible and uplifts Jesus. You really should read some of her books.

1. Where is your proof that slavery is not coming back? Look at what is happening in the world today. People all over the world are being enslaved as we speak. White did not say that slavery would come back upon racial lines. You added that part.
The Bible says that there will be slavery at the second coming of Christ. A bondman is a slave.

Revelation 6:15-16 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the cheif captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; And said to the mountains and the rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of Him that sits on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb.

2. Adam also was decieved, but not in the same way as Eve. He sinned didn't he? Nothing wrong with that statement.

3. The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty. If you believe He was you need to do some serious Bible study. The Lord God Almighty is the Father. Jesus said,"The Father is greater than I."

4. I don't need to defend Ellen White. I really appreciate her writings and praise God for them. You are just being negative because you have a thing against organized religion.
Jesus expects His followers to be organized. Read Matthew 18 on the process of redeeming a brother. Jesus says take it to the Church. Without organization there is no Church. "Forsake not the assembling of yourselves together" . If there is no organization there is no assembly.

Kingarthurhk
08-15-2011, 04:34
[QUOTE=Vic Hays;17775441][QUOTE=achysklic;17773891]

Did her prophecy of "colored people" come true? Ummm No!
"Slavery will again be revived in the Southern States; for the spirit of slavery still lives. Therefore it will not do for those who labor among the colored people to preach the truth as boldly and openly as they would be free to do in other places. Even Christ clothed His lessons in figures and parables to avoid the opposition of the Pharisees." (Spalding & Magan Collection, page 21 and 2 MR #153, page 300)



This one is easy. The spirit of slavery existed with Jim Crow laws and segregation. It wasn't until Martin Luther King that things started to reverse. Moreover, in my lifetime there have been actual slaves in the South. Granted, they weren't black, but they sure weren't white. Without getting into too many specifics, because even though this happened in 9-10 years ago, it isn't common knowledge. There was a compound in Florida that held illegal immigrants with armed guards forcing them to harvest oranges without payment. Modern slavery. It exists.

achysklic
08-15-2011, 06:46
[QUOTE=achysklic;17775682][QUOTE=Vic Hays;17775441]

I dont see anything wrong with those quotes. Only a person desperately determined to discredit E G White would see anything wrong with them. Ellen White wrote about 100,000 pages. She always points to the Bible and uplifts Jesus. You really should read some of her books.

1. Where is your proof that slavery is not coming back? Look at what is happening in the world today. People all over the world are being enslaved as we speak. White did not say that slavery would come back upon racial lines. You added that part.
The Bible says that there will be slavery at the second coming of Christ. A bondman is a slave.

Revelation 6:15-16 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the cheif captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; And said to the mountains and the rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of Him that sits on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb.

2. Adam also was decieved, but not in the same way as Eve. He sinned didn't he? Nothing wrong with that statement.

3. The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty. If you believe He was you need to do some serious Bible study. The Lord God Almighty is the Father. Jesus said,"The Father is greater than I."

4. I don't need to defend Ellen White. I really appreciate her writings and praise God for them. You are just being negative because you have a thing against organized religion.
Jesus expects His followers to be organized. Read Matthew 18 on the process of redeeming a brother. Jesus says take it to the Church. Without organization there is no Church. "Forsake not the assembling of yourselves together" . If there is no organization there is no assembly.


Your reasoning is clouded to say the least. According to your way of thinking Mary Eddy Baker,Muhammad,Joseph Smith,Nostradamus must all be prophets of God.

See this is just crazy just because someones occasional prophecies comes true doesn't make them a true prophet, the Bible is clear if you fail just once you are a false prophet.

Look at pharoh his priest preformed wonders just as moses did. Were they of God? SATAN gives power and visions to his children to deceive the world.

EW made many false predictions, she may have made many true ones as well,however because of the false ones you should flee from her.

Let's look at some of her fails.

"My accompanying angel said, 'Time is almost finished. Get ready, get ready, get ready.' . . . now time is almost finished. . . and what we have been years learning, they will have to learn in a few months." (Early Writings, pp. 64-67)

In 1873, the editor of the Swedish edition of Advent Herald, Mr. C. Carlstedt, had become seriously ill with Typhoid fever. Mrs. White and others were called to his bedside to pray for Carlstedt. On their way home from the prayer meeting, Mrs. White remarked that the Lord was...

"present with his restoring power, to raise Carlstedt, whose sickness was not unto death, but to the glory of the Son of God." (Charles Lee, Three Important Questions for Seventh-Day Adventists to Consider)

Charles Lee, who at that time was a Seventh-day Adventist minister, was at the prayer meeting and was a witness to Mrs. White's prediction. Sadly, Mrs. White was dead wrong. Carlstedt was dead within one week of her statement.

achysklic
08-15-2011, 07:05
Here EW describes satan...now bear in mind that satan was a angel, spirit , not flesh and blood.

"I was then shown Satan as he was, a happy, exalted angel. Then I was shown him as he now is. He still bears a kingly form. His features are still noble, for he is an angel fallen. But the expression of his countenance is full of anxiety, care, unhappiness, malice, hate, mischief, deceit, and every evil. That brow which was once so noble, I particularly noticed. His forehead commenced from his eyes to recede backward. I saw that he had demeaned himself so long, that every good quality was debased, and every evil trait was developed. His eyes were cunning, sly, and showed great penetration. His frame was large, but the flesh hung loosely about his hands and face. As I beheld him, his chin was resting upon his left hand. He appeared to be in deep thought. A smile was upon his countenance, which made me tremble, it was so full of evil, and Satanic slyness." (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1, p. 27)

These verses show the Bible teaches that angelic beings are "spirits", and that spirit beings, do not have a body composed of "flesh and blood". This "vision" directly contradicts the Bible and illustrates that her visions did not originate with God.

EW claimed it was a sin to be sick,

It is a sin to be sick; for all sickness is the result of transgression. Health Reformer, Aug. 1, 1866

The Bible however states otherwise.......

So went Satan forth from the presence of the LORD, and smote Job [a "perfect and upright man" (Job 2:3)] with sore boils from the sole of his foot unto his crown. Job 2:7


EW being alittle confused thought a angel spoke to cain,

"Through an angel messenger the divine warning was conveyed: 'If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?'" (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 74).

Who actually spoke to cain?

"Then the Lord said to Cain, 'Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right will you not be accepted?' ... So Cain went out from the Lord's presence" (Genesis 4:6, 7, 10, 13, 15, 16).

According to EW God hates wicked children...........lol

"God loves honest-hearted, truthful children, but cannot love those who are dishonest. . . . The Lord loves those little children who try to do right, and he has promised that they shall be in his kingdom. But wicked children God does not love. . . . When you feel tempted to speak impatient and fretful, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong." (An Appeal to the Youth, pp. 42, 61, 62)


What does God say about this?

"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." (Rom. 5:8)
"Love your enemies" (Luke 6:27).


Vic, this can go on and on I left out some important fails like that she claimed Jesus would return in june 1845 and when that didn't happen she claimed sept. 1845 would be that date. You know what the Bible says about trying to predict the time of Jesus return don't you?

achysklic
08-15-2011, 07:07
[QUOTE=achysklic;17775682][QUOTE=Vic Hays;17775441]


3. The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty. If you believe He was you need to do some serious Bible study. The Lord God Almighty is the Father. Jesus said,"The Father is greater than I."


Vic, I did some Bible study, guess what I found?

"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace" (Isaiah 9:6).

Vic Hays
08-15-2011, 07:28
[QUOTE=Vic Hays;17778051][QUOTE=achysklic;17775682]

Vic, I did some Bible study, guess what I found?

"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace" (Isaiah 9:6).

Guess what? Mighty God and Lord God Almighty are not the same.

Seriously Achy, you are batting zero. Do you really want to keep this up and continue getting embarrassed? Those websites you are getting your information from are going to continue to let you down. Do you think that this is what God wants you top do? Do you want to be the accuser of the brethren?

Jesus still loves you.

achysklic
08-15-2011, 07:47
[QUOTE=achysklic;17778713][QUOTE=Vic Hays;17778051]

Guess what? Mighty God and Lord God Almighty are not the same.

Seriously Achy, you are batting zero. Do you really want to keep this up and continue getting embarrassed? Those websites you are getting your information from are going to continue to let you down. Do you think that this is what God wants you top do? Do you want to be the accuser of the brethren?

Jesus still loves you.


Are you serious Vic?

Go on continue to be in denial if you so choose.

Vic Hays
08-15-2011, 08:29
1. Here EW describes satan...now bear in mind that satan was a angel, spirit , not flesh and blood.

"I was then shown Satan as he was, a happy, exalted angel. Then I was shown him as he now is. He still bears a kingly form. His features are still noble, for he is an angel fallen. But the expression of his countenance is full of anxiety, care, unhappiness, malice, hate, mischief, deceit, and every evil. That brow which was once so noble, I particularly noticed. His forehead commenced from his eyes to recede backward. I saw that he had demeaned himself so long, that every good quality was debased, and every evil trait was developed. His eyes were cunning, sly, and showed great penetration. His frame was large, but the flesh hung loosely about his hands and face. As I beheld him, his chin was resting upon his left hand. He appeared to be in deep thought. A smile was upon his countenance, which made me tremble, it was so full of evil, and Satanic slyness." (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1, p. 27)

These verses show the Bible teaches that angelic beings are "spirits", and that spirit beings, do not have a body composed of "flesh and blood". This "vision" directly contradicts the Bible and illustrates that her visions did not originate with God.

2. EW claimed it was a sin to be sick,

It is a sin to be sick; for all sickness is the result of transgression. Health Reformer, Aug. 1, 1866

The Bible however states otherwise.......

So went Satan forth from the presence of the LORD, and smote Job [a "perfect and upright man" (Job 2:3)] with sore boils from the sole of his foot unto his crown. Job 2:7


3. EW being alittle confused thought a angel spoke to cain,

"Through an angel messenger the divine warning was conveyed: 'If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?'" (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 74).

Who actually spoke to cain?

"Then the Lord said to Cain, 'Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right will you not be accepted?' ... So Cain went out from the Lord's presence" (Genesis 4:6, 7, 10, 13, 15, 16).

4. According to EW God hates wicked children...........lol

"God loves honest-hearted, truthful children, but cannot love those who are dishonest. . . . The Lord loves those little children who try to do right, and he has promised that they shall be in his kingdom. But wicked children God does not love. . . . When you feel tempted to speak impatient and fretful, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong." (An Appeal to the Youth, pp. 42, 61, 62)


What does God say about this?

"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." (Rom. 5:8)
"Love your enemies" (Luke 6:27).


5. Vic, this can go on and on I left out some important fails like that she claimed Jesus would return in june 1845 and when that didn't happen she claimed sept. 1845 would be that date. You know what the Bible says about trying to predict the time of Jesus return don't you?

Achy

1. You are claiming that angels cannot be seen because they are spirit? Have you come upon any instances in the Bible where angels have been seen in the Bible? If you haven't read the story about Samson, the story about John the Baptist, the story about the angels after the resurrection, The story about Gabriel appearing to Mary and Joseph. I will even quote you one from Revelation about prophets and angels.

Rev 19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said to me, see thou do it not: I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

2. Do you think there was sickness in the garden of Eden before sin came in? Of course all sickness is the result of sin. You are twisting the meaning here. The very next sentence explains that sickness can come as a result of inheritance. Any thing anyone says can be taken out of context.

"Many are suffering in consequence of the transgression of their parents. They cannot be censured for their parents’ sin; but it is nevertheless their duty to ascertain wherein their parents violated the laws of their being, which has entailed upon their offspring so miserable an inheritance; and wherein their parents’ habits were wrong, they should change their course, and place themselves by correct habits in a better relation to health."

3. I don't know the exact way that God communicated with Cain because I was not there. Were you? God can speak through an angel.

Exodus 3:2 And the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush......................................................

4. Yes, God loves everyone and wants us to be saved, however sometimes language is used to make a point. There are several Bible texts that use hate this way.

Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

5. The claim that Ellen White ever set a time for the second coming of Jesus is a pure lie. Never happened. She never set times at all for the second coming. You probably got this from some hate site.
Do you want to hate? Is this what you want to be connected with, bitterness and lies? Christianity is so positive and wonderful. I praise God every day for His goodness toward me.

achysklic
08-15-2011, 09:29
Achy

1. You are claiming that angels cannot be seen because they are spirit? Have you come upon any instances in the Bible where angels have been seen in the Bible? If you haven't read the story about Samson, the story about John the Baptist, the story about the angels after the resurrection, The story about Gabriel appearing to Mary and Joseph. I will even quote you one from Revelation about prophets and angels.

Rev 19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said to me, see thou do it not: I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

2. Do you think there was sickness in the garden of Eden before sin came in? Of course all sickness is the result of sin. You are twisting the meaning here. The very next sentence explains that sickness can come as a result of inheritance. Any thing anyone says can be taken out of context.

"Many are suffering in consequence of the transgression of their parents. They cannot be censured for their parents’ sin; but it is nevertheless their duty to ascertain wherein their parents violated the laws of their being, which has entailed upon their offspring so miserable an inheritance; and wherein their parents’ habits were wrong, they should change their course, and place themselves by correct habits in a better relation to health."

3. I don't know the exact way that God communicated with Cain because I was not there. Were you? God can speak through an angel.

Exodus 3:2 And the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush......................................................

4. Yes, God loves everyone and wants us to be saved, however sometimes language is used to make a point. There are several Bible texts that use hate this way.

Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

5. The claim that Ellen White ever set a time for the second coming of Jesus is a pure lie. Never happened. She never set times at all for the second coming. You probably got this from some hate site.
Do you want to hate? Is this what you want to be connected with, bitterness and lies? Christianity is so positive and wonderful. I praise God every day for His goodness toward me.


Vic, you speak out of both sides of your mouth. You act like you want this to end, and then continue nwith this rubbish. You are the type that always has to have the last word in. Guess what? that's what makes you so easy to ruffle.

1)Here you go implying I said angels could not be seen. I never said that. You added as you always do. I said EW was wrong in her description of satan. Didn't God say that he was to crawl on his belly forever?

2)Sin 1john3:4 sin is the transgression of the law.... How can you even think all sickness is the result of transgression of the law. I have seen many babies sick that have never transgressed Gods laws!

3)Can you not read Vic? The Bible says exactly how God communicated with Cain...geesh

"Then the Lord said to Cain, 'Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right will you not be accepted?' ... So Cain went out from the Lord's presence" (Genesis 4:6, 7, 10, 13, 15, 16).

4)EW wasn't using the term "hate" as you claim has lesser value.She said God didn't love wicked children...Sorry Vic, God loves EVERYONE!

"But wicked children God does not love. "

5)Typical denial of false predictions of EW

Vic, you can stop now and not respond, or you can keep this going by responding....Your choice

You should spend your time researching the false prophet instead..you may learn the truth.

Roering
08-15-2011, 10:00
Evidence that Ellen White is a false prophet?

If that is what you are asking I think throughout this thread I provided alot of evidence.

If you would like more I can cite more.

In all fairness to Ellen, she never claimed herself to be a prophet. She was a propagandist fiction writer who found herself with a cult following. She just kind of went with it since the $$$ was flowing in.

Quite similar to Elron Hubbard and the Scientologists.

Vic Hays
08-15-2011, 13:48
[QUOTE=achysklic;17779245]Vic, you speak out of both sides of your mouth. You act like you want this to end, and then continue with this rubbish. You are the type that always has to have the last word in. Guess what? that's what makes you so easy to ruffle.
QUOTE]

You are the one who called the tune insisting on posting all the garbage of all the hate sites. You also unfortunately could not accept logical answers.

I want to thank you for asking those questions that exonerate Ellen White from all the bad press she has recieved. :wavey:

The Bible sums it up:

Matthew 5:11-12 "Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be excedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

Vic Hays
08-15-2011, 14:14
In all fairness to Ellen, she never claimed herself to be a prophet. She was a propagandist fiction writer who found herself with a cult following. She just kind of went with it since the $$$ was flowing in.

Quite similar to Elron Hubbard and the Scientologists.

You are misunderstanding Ellen Whites humility and are incorrect on all accounts.

Some of the Adventists thought something similar to you when Ellen White said she was not a prophet, she was "more than a prophet."

Ellen White: Woman of Vision, Page 490
Chapter 35—Ellen White’s Special Gift
Ellen White had a very special gift. She described it clearly:

Some have stumbled over the fact that I said I did not claim to be a prophet; and they have asked, Why is this?

I have had no claims to make, only that I am instructed that I am the Lord’s messenger; that He called me in my youth to be His messenger, to receive His word, and to give a clear and decided message in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Early in my youth I was asked several times, Are you a prophet? I have ever responded, I am the Lord’s messenger. I know that many have called me a prophet, but I have made no claim to this title. My Saviour declared me to be His messenger.”Your work,” He instructed me, “is to bear My word.” ...

Why have I not claimed to be a prophet? Because in these days many who boldly claim that they are prophets are a reproach to the cause of Christ; and because my work includes much more than the word “prophet” signifies....

God has made plain to me the various ways in which He would use me to carry forward a special work. Visions have been given me, with the promise, “If you deliver the messages faithfully and endure to the end, you shall eat of the fruit of the tree of life, and drink of the water of the river of life” (Selected Messages 1:31-33).

After describing the breadth of the work she was commissioned to do, she declared:

To claim to be a prophetess is something that I have never done. If others call me by that name, I have no controversy with them. But my work has covered so many lines that I cannot call myself other than a messenger sent to bear a message from the Lord to His people, and to take up work in any line that He points out (Ibid., 1:34).

Because on one occasion she mentioned to a large audience in the Battle Creek Tabernacle that she did not consider herself a prophet or a leader of

Ellen White: Woman of Vision, Page 491
people, on the following Monday the newspapers at Battle Creek heralded the news: The woman the Adventists had believed in all these years as a prophet had now come straight out and said she was not a prophet after all! This naturally raised questions with some Adventists. Mrs. White and church leaders found that an explanation must be made. She took opportunity on several occasions to explain carefully the thoughts she intended to convey by her statement. W. C. White throws considerable light on the matter in the following statement:

When she spoke these words she had in mind the ideas of the people regarding a prophet as one whose chief office was to predict events, and she wanted them to understand that that was not her place in the world.

More Than A Prophet
Ellen White was more than a prophet. She was a counselor, a comforter, guide, author, writer, public speaker.

All her life she had encountered opposition, antagonism, and criticism in all shapes and forms from the trivial to the serious. She was quoted and misquoted, interpreted and misinterpreted. But the value of her words was evidenced in schools, sanitariums, and churches all over the world.

Rarely did she defend herself. But now in the sunset of life she was forced into replying to her critics. It was a painful experience to her to know that there were members of God’s family who were well acquainted with her and her work but who, on the basis of hearsay and flimsy evidence, had lost confidence in her prophetic mission. That they could so easily forget the many faith-confirming evidences of her call and work, burdened her heart.

What were some of these faith-confirming evidences?

The hundreds of letters crossing thousands of miles of land or sea to arrive at a critical time.

The many people who received letters of counsel on personal matters known only to themselves and God.

The numbers of times she had met individuals for the first time whom she recognized, having seen them in vision.

The credible eyewitness descriptions of the phenomena that accompanied her in vision in the early days of her work.

The lives of leaders such as Daniells, Bates, Loughborough, Haskell, whose doubts had been dispelled.

I am now instructed that I am not to be hindered in my work by those who engage in suppositions regarding its nature, whose minds are struggling with so many intricate problems connected with the supposed

Ellen White: Woman of Vision, Page 492
work of a prophet. My commission embraces the work of a prophet, but it does not end there. It embraces much more than the minds of those who have been sowing the seeds of unbelief can comprehend (Letter 244, 1906 [see also Selected Messages 1:31-35]).

achysklic
08-15-2011, 14:22
You are misunderstanding Ellen Whites humility and are incorrect on all accounts.

Some of the Adventists thought something similar to you when Ellen White said she was not a prophet, she was "more than a prophet."

Ellen White: Woman of Vision, Page 490
Chapter 35—Ellen White’s Special Gift
Ellen White had a very special gift. She described it clearly:

Some have stumbled over the fact that I said I did not claim to be a prophet; and they have asked, Why is this?

I have had no claims to make, only that I am instructed that I am the Lord’s messenger; that He called me in my youth to be His messenger, to receive His word, and to give a clear and decided message in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Early in my youth I was asked several times, Are you a prophet? I have ever responded, I am the Lord’s messenger. I know that many have called me a prophet, but I have made no claim to this title. My Saviour declared me to be His messenger.”Your work,” He instructed me, “is to bear My word.” ...

Why have I not claimed to be a prophet? Because in these days many who boldly claim that they are prophets are a reproach to the cause of Christ; and because my work includes much more than the word “prophet” signifies....

God has made plain to me the various ways in which He would use me to carry forward a special work. Visions have been given me, with the promise, “If you deliver the messages faithfully and endure to the end, you shall eat of the fruit of the tree of life, and drink of the water of the river of life” (Selected Messages 1:31-33).

After describing the breadth of the work she was commissioned to do, she declared:

To claim to be a prophetess is something that I have never done. If others call me by that name, I have no controversy with them. But my work has covered so many lines that I cannot call myself other than a messenger sent to bear a message from the Lord to His people, and to take up work in any line that He points out (Ibid., 1:34).

Because on one occasion she mentioned to a large audience in the Battle Creek Tabernacle that she did not consider herself a prophet or a leader of

Ellen White: Woman of Vision, Page 491
people, on the following Monday the newspapers at Battle Creek heralded the news: The woman the Adventists had believed in all these years as a prophet had now come straight out and said she was not a prophet after all! This naturally raised questions with some Adventists. Mrs. White and church leaders found that an explanation must be made. She took opportunity on several occasions to explain carefully the thoughts she intended to convey by her statement. W. C. White throws considerable light on the matter in the following statement:

When she spoke these words she had in mind the ideas of the people regarding a prophet as one whose chief office was to predict events, and she wanted them to understand that that was not her place in the world.

More Than A Prophet
Ellen White was more than a prophet. She was a counselor, a comforter, guide, author, writer, public speaker.

All her life she had encountered opposition, antagonism, and criticism in all shapes and forms from the trivial to the serious. She was quoted and misquoted, interpreted and misinterpreted. But the value of her words was evidenced in schools, sanitariums, and churches all over the world.

Rarely did she defend herself. But now in the sunset of life she was forced into replying to her critics. It was a painful experience to her to know that there were members of God’s family who were well acquainted with her and her work but who, on the basis of hearsay and flimsy evidence, had lost confidence in her prophetic mission. That they could so easily forget the many faith-confirming evidences of her call and work, burdened her heart.

What were some of these faith-confirming evidences?

The hundreds of letters crossing thousands of miles of land or sea to arrive at a critical time.

The many people who received letters of counsel on personal matters known only to themselves and God.

The numbers of times she had met individuals for the first time whom she recognized, having seen them in vision.

The credible eyewitness descriptions of the phenomena that accompanied her in vision in the early days of her work.

The lives of leaders such as Daniells, Bates, Loughborough, Haskell, whose doubts had been dispelled.

I am now instructed that I am not to be hindered in my work by those who engage in suppositions regarding its nature, whose minds are struggling with so many intricate problems connected with the supposed

Ellen White: Woman of Vision, Page 492
work of a prophet. My commission embraces the work of a prophet, but it does not end there. It embraces much more than the minds of those who have been sowing the seeds of unbelief can comprehend (Letter 244, 1906 [see also Selected Messages 1:31-35]).


Well since you refused the offer I gave to drop this dear Vic be prepared to face the truth.

Did EW claim to be a prophet? well she claimed to do the work of a prophet so call it as you see it Mr. Rose colored glasses Vic!

"I am now instructed that I am not to be hindered in my work by those who engage in suppositions regarding its nature, whose minds are struggling with so many intricate problems connected with the supposed work of a prophet. My commission embraces the work of a prophet, but it does not end there. It embraces much more than the minds of those who have been sowing the seeds of unbelief can comprehend.--Letter 244, 1906. (Addressed to elders of Battle Creek church.)" (Selected Messages, Book 1, page 36, paragraph 2.)

Schabesbert
08-15-2011, 14:35
:rofl::rofl::rofl:

First you say the RCC is above scripture and then you say they follow scripture. Spin, spin , spin. Do you even know which way is up?
Vic, you're really becoming a disappointment.
You've gone to dishonesty as your only defense quite often, now.

To quote YOU:
1. Do you wish to be a false accuser?

Apparently, YOU do!

Or, perhaps you can actually come up with a link to a statement by me saying that "the RCC is above scripture."


Jesus said the wise person who builds on the Rock will judge them by their fruits.
Exactly. So, Jesus, who IS the Judge, correct?, is the builder in that analogy. NOT the rock.


Catholics do claim the prophetic gift even though you said the opposite which is a falsehood.
Where did I make a claim about this at all?


Still waiting for you to address the scriptural arguments that I made in post #180. Should I take it to mean that you have nothing?

Vic Hays
08-15-2011, 14:36
Well since you refused the offer I gave to drop this dear Vic be prepared to face the truth.

Did EW claim to be a prophet? well she claimed to do the work of a prophet so call it as you see it Mr. Rose colored glasses Vic!

"I am now instructed that I am not to be hindered in my work by those who engage in suppositions regarding its nature, whose minds are struggling with so many intricate problems connected with the supposed work of a prophet. My commission embraces the work of a prophet, but it does not end there. It embraces much more than the minds of those who have been sowing the seeds of unbelief can comprehend.--Letter 244, 1906. (Addressed to elders of Battle Creek church.)" (Selected Messages, Book 1, page 36, paragraph 2.)

Thank you for confirming my post. God has been exceedingly good to the Seventh-day Adventist Church to provide someone as high of caliber and unique as Ellen White to keep the Church on the strait and narrow.

:cool:

achysklic
08-15-2011, 14:57
Thank you for confirming my post. God has been exceedingly good to the Seventh-day Adventist Church to provide someone as high of caliber and unique as Ellen White to keep the Church on the strait and narrow.

:cool:


:rofl:Vic that is the craziest thing you have ever posted!

You are falling apart and looking the fool with each post.

Go ahead follow your false prophet


"I also saw that Old Jerusalem would never be built up."
Early Writings Pg 75.
Hmmm, looks to me like Old Jerusalem has been built up.
One false prophecy makes a false prophet.

Mrs White said she would be alive when Jesus returns...
"Soon our eyes were drawn to the East, for a small black cloud had
appeared, about half as large as a man's hand, which we all knew was the
sign of the Son of Man...we were changed and caught up together with
them to meet the Lord in the air."
Early Writings pg 15-16.
Hmmm, the Lord has not returned. Is Mrs White still alive?
One false prophecy makes a false prophet.


This can go on and on Vic...but why bother you are too deceived to listen or care.

Roering
08-15-2011, 15:10
Maybe it was "Profitess"?

Vic Hays
08-15-2011, 15:15
:rofl:Vic that is the craziest thing you have ever posted!

You are falling apart and looking the fool with each post.

Go ahead follow your false prophet


"I also saw that Old Jerusalem would never be built up."
Early Writings Pg 75.
Hmmm, looks to me like Old Jerusalem has been built up.
One false prophecy makes a false prophet.

Mrs White said she would be alive when Jesus returns...
"Soon our eyes were drawn to the East, for a small black cloud had
appeared, about half as large as a man's hand, which we all knew was the
sign of the Son of Man...we were changed and caught up together with
them to meet the Lord in the air."
Early Writings pg 15-16.
Hmmm, the Lord has not returned. Is Mrs White still alive?
One false prophecy makes a false prophet.


This can go on and on Vic...but why bother you are too deceived to listen or care.


You wish to continue?

1. Where is the New Temple in the Old jerusalem. Strike one on you.

2. The dead in Christ are raised first. She did not say she would be alive at Jesus coming. Notice that Paul writes in the first person describing the second coming. Is Paul still alive? More poor reading skills and supposition on your part. Strike two on you.

I Thessalonians 4:16-17 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trump of God. And the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall ever be with the Lord.

This is getting good. I want to thank you for vindicating Ellen White.

God bless you.

Roering
08-15-2011, 15:25
From Wiki....

Head injury:

At the age of nine, Ellen was struck with a rock thrown by a fellow student. The injury severely disfigured her nose, and left her in a coma for three weeks


Case closed.

Vic Hays
08-15-2011, 15:48
Vic, you're really becoming a disappointment.
You've gone to dishonesty as your only defense quite often, now.

To quote YOU:
1. Do you wish to be a false accuser?

Apparently, YOU do!

Or, perhaps you can actually come up with a link to a statement by me saying that "the RCC is above scripture

Exactly. So, Jesus, who IS the Judge, correct?, is the builder in that analogy. NOT the rock.


Where did I make a claim about this at all?


Well, not in those exact words, but you do keep saying that the Bible is not enough. Jesus and His words are the rock upon which the wise man builds his house according to scripture. The RCC claims also that tradition is superior to scripture.

The builder according to Jesus is that wise man who builds his house upon the rock. Please read carefully what Jesus is saying.

Matthew 7:24 "Therefore whoever hears these sayings of mine and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock:

I know it goes against your beliefs to think that the rock would be Jesus and his words, but that is what Jesus is saying unless you have invented a newspeak language.

Are you saying that you and your sect do not believe that the Pope is inspired? If that is the case where do you guys come up with the immaculate conception, the assumption of Mary, the infallibility of the church? These are not scriptural.

Vic Hays
08-15-2011, 15:52
From Wiki....

Head injury:

At the age of nine, Ellen was struck with a rock thrown by a fellow student. The injury severely disfigured her nose, and left her in a coma for three weeks


Case closed.

Isn't it wonderful that God used the weakest of the weak to confound the mighty? She managed to write 100,000 pages in her lifetime and all her detractors can come up with is the kind of stuff Achey was posting.

achysklic
08-15-2011, 16:10
You wish to continue?

1. Where is the New Temple in the Old jerusalem. Strike one on you.

2. The dead in Christ are raised first. She did not say she would be alive at Jesus coming. Notice that Paul writes in the first person describing the second coming. Is Paul still alive? More poor reading skills and supposition on your part. Strike two on you.

I Thessalonians 4:16-17 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trump of God. And the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall ever be with the Lord.

This is getting good. I want to thank you for vindicating Ellen White.

God bless you.


Vic you are picking a battle you cannot win...I asked if you wanted this to stop you have chosen not to do so.

I vision you as one of those wide eyed people in Waco texas that died for a mad man ( wait he was a SDA wasn't he?)

I do have to ask that you quit adding to what I post I never said one thing about New Temple in the Old jerusalem.

as far as her being alive when Jesus returns. Why did she keep using the term "we" if she wasn't included?

One more thing Vic, last chance to quit.......

Mrs White said in May of 1856 that some of those listening to her will live
to see the return of Jesus...
Some of those that were attending a meeting with her would become food
for worms, and some would live to become subjects of the seven last
plagues, and some others would "remain upon the earth to be translated
at the coming of Jesus."
Testimonies for the Church, vol 1, pg 131-132.
Hmmm, that statement was made over 140 years ago. Has Jesus come yet?
Are any of those at that 1856 meeting still alive?
One false prophecy makes a false prophet.

Schabesbert
08-15-2011, 16:37
Well, not in those exact words,
Thank you. Admitting a lie is the first step to repentance.

but you do keep saying that the Bible is not enough.
True. It is not.

The Bible itself makes this point.

So, IF you believed in the Bible, you'd believe in the Church.

The RCC claims also that tradition is superior to scripture.
Oops. Something more to repent of.

The builder according to Jesus is that wise man who builds his house upon the rock. Please read carefully what Jesus is saying.

Matthew 7:24 "Therefore whoever hears these sayings of mine and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock:
Yes. Whoever hears Jesus' instructions and follows them will be like Jesus.

Are you saying that you and your sect do not believe that the Pope is inspired?
Are you saying that you don't know, and yet you've made a definitive statement about it?

Shouldn't you find out BEFORE you make a claim?

Isn't it dishonest to make a claim and THEN ask? :shame:

If that is the case where do you guys come up with the immaculate conception, the assumption of Mary, the infallibility of the church? These are not scriptural.
You could start a thread on this if you'd like.

Short answers:
Immaculate Conception & Assumption: evidence in scripture, belief from Apostolic Tradition, natural conclusions from the nature of Jesus.

Infallibility of the Church: conclusion from scripture (in much the same was as the Trinity and the Hypostatic Union were not explicitely stated in scripture, but are required if all of scripture is to be true and harmonized), as well as Apostolic Tradition.

Roering
08-15-2011, 17:53
Isn't it wonderful that God used the weakest of the weak to confound the mighty? She managed to write 100,000 pages in her lifetime and all her detractors can come up with is the kind of stuff Achey was posting.

Possibly, but to use your own theology one must conclude that Ellen is not a prophet because nowhere in scripture does it say that Ellen White is a prohet. Or do you follow a doctrine in addition to scripture now?

Kingarthurhk
08-15-2011, 18:56
Possibly, but to use your own theology one must conclude that Ellen is not a prophet because nowhere in scripture does it say that Ellen White is a prohet. Or do you follow a doctrine in addition to scripture now?

As opposed to the Roman Catholic Docrine of instead of scripture. Or perhaps, scripture is incovenient, so let's just simply contravene, change or deny it altogether as the mood of the church suits?

I believe the Adventist perspective it is lesser light pointing to the light (scripture), not in addition to, or even required. An astute student of scripture doesn't need the crutch.

Vic Hays
08-15-2011, 19:41
Possibly, but to use your own theology one must conclude that Ellen is not a prophet because nowhere in scripture does it say that Ellen White is a prohet. Or do you follow a doctrine in addition to scripture now?

Some prophets are not named by scripture. The prophetic gift is at God's prerogative. Jesus told us to judge them by their fruit. If they were named in scripture we wouldn't have to judge.

God chooses who He gives spiritual gifts to according to scripture. You stated that you choose who has authority over you. That is sort of like the Mormons electing their prophet isn't it?

I Corinthians 12:7-11 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: for to one is given the word of wisdom through the work of the Spirit, to another the word of knowlege through the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the same Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues, But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He will.

Roering
08-16-2011, 01:05
"The mild form of posttrauma seizure could explain both her "visions" and her personality foibles . Most neurologists agree that a missile-induced head injury such as the one that caused Ellen Harmon three weeks of coma followed by amnesia at age nine increases manifold the likelihood that she would develop subsequently some kind of seizure disorder."

Terrible thing to happen to someone. But she just wasn't right in the head. I might add to the neurologist's statements that damage to the frontal and possibly parietal lobe can also be a cause for paranoia. Clearly noticeable from some conspiracy theories in her writings.

The seizures and hallucinations she experienced in the following years were typical of someone with that type of brain injury.

Roering
08-16-2011, 01:07
taking out

achysklic
08-16-2011, 05:58
Jesus told us to judge them by their fruit.

God told us several ways to test a prophet. EW failed.

Deut.18:<SUP id=en-KJV-5405 class=versenum>20</SUP>But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.

<SUP id=en-KJV-5406 class=versenum>21</SUP>And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? <SUP id=en-KJV-5407 class=versenum>22</SUP>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.

Jeremiah 23:31 Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that use their tongues, and say, He saith.
32 Behold, I am against them that prophesy false <SUP class=studyNoteMarker>a</SUP>dreams (http://lds.org/scriptures/ot/jer/23?lang=eng#), saith the Lord, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them: therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the Lord.

Jeremiah 29:<SUP>8</SUP> For thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: Do not let your prophets and your diviners who are in your midst deceive you, nor listen to your dreams which you cause to be dreamed. <SUP id=en-NKJV-19642 class=versenum>9</SUP> For they prophesy falsely to you in My name; I have not sent them, says the LORD.

Ezekiel 13:<SUP>8</SUP>Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Because ye have spoken vanity, and seen lies, therefore, behold, I am against you, saith the Lord GOD.
<SUP id=en-KJV-20718 class=versenum>9</SUP>And mine hand shall be upon the prophets that see vanity, and that divine lies: they shall not be in the assembly of my people, neither shall they be written in the writing of the house of Israel, neither shall they enter into the land of Israel; and ye shall know that I am the Lord GOD.

EW is a liar, the proof has been laid out many times, it only takes 1 time being wrong to be considered a liar and false prophet to God.

Vic can you sit here and say EW was right 100% of the time?

If you can't you need to discard all her teachings.

If you think she was, you are among the blind and deceived by satan and really need prayed for by the members on this forum.

Vic Hays
08-16-2011, 09:15
"The mild form of posttrauma seizure could explain both her "visions" and her personality foibles . Most neurologists agree that a missile-induced head injury such as the one that caused Ellen Harmon three weeks of coma followed by amnesia at age nine increases manifold the likelihood that she would develop subsequently some kind of seizure disorder."

Terrible thing to happen to someone. But she just wasn't right in the head. I might add to the neurologist's statements that damage to the frontal and possibly parietal lobe can also be a cause for paranoia. Clearly noticeable from some conspiracy theories in her writings.

The seizures and hallucinations she experienced in the following years were typical of someone with that type of brain injury.

It is amazing how easily people are prejudiced by hearsay and slander.
People said that Jesus had a demon too. The fruits of her life say otherwise. Hundreds of letters crossing land and sea and arriving at critical times are not the work of a deluded individual.

http://www.whiteestate.org/search/search.asp
Ellen White: Woman of Vision, Page 491
"Ellen White was more than a prophet. She was a counselor, a comforter, guide, author, writer, public speaker.

All her life she had encountered opposition, antagonism, and criticism in all shapes and forms from the trivial to the serious. She was quoted and misquoted, interpreted and misinterpreted. But the value of her words was evidenced in schools, sanitariums, and churches all over the world.

Rarely did she defend herself. But now in the sunset of life she was forced into replying to her critics. It was a painful experience to her to know that there were members of God’s family who were well acquainted with her and her work but who, on the basis of hearsay and flimsy evidence, had lost confidence in her prophetic mission. That they could so easily forget the many faith-confirming evidences of her call and work, burdened her heart.

What were some of these faith-confirming evidences?

The hundreds of letters crossing thousands of miles of land or sea to arrive at a critical time.

The many people who received letters of counsel on personal matters known only to themselves and God.

The numbers of times she had met individuals for the first time whom she recognized, having seen them in vision.

The credible eyewitness descriptions of the phenomena that accompanied her in vision in the early days of her work.

The lives of leaders such as Daniells, Bates, Loughborough, Haskell, whose doubts had been dispelled."

achysklic
08-16-2011, 09:36
It is amazing how easily people are prejudiced by hearsay and slander.
People said that Jesus had a demon too. The fruits of her life say otherwise. Hundreds of letters crossing land and sea and arriving at critical times are not the work of a deluded individual.

http://www.whiteestate.org/search/search.asp
Ellen White: Woman of Vision, Page 491
"Ellen White was more than a prophet. She was a counselor, a comforter, guide, author, writer, public speaker.

All her life she had encountered opposition, antagonism, and criticism in all shapes and forms from the trivial to the serious. She was quoted and misquoted, interpreted and misinterpreted. But the value of her words was evidenced in schools, sanitariums, and churches all over the world.

Rarely did she defend herself. But now in the sunset of life she was forced into replying to her critics. It was a painful experience to her to know that there were members of God’s family who were well acquainted with her and her work but who, on the basis of hearsay and flimsy evidence, had lost confidence in her prophetic mission. That they could so easily forget the many faith-confirming evidences of her call and work, burdened her heart.

What were some of these faith-confirming evidences?

The hundreds of letters crossing thousands of miles of land or sea to arrive at a critical time.

The many people who received letters of counsel on personal matters known only to themselves and God.

The numbers of times she had met individuals for the first time whom she recognized, having seen them in vision.

The credible eyewitness descriptions of the phenomena that accompanied her in vision in the early days of her work.

The lives of leaders such as Daniells, Bates, Loughborough, Haskell, whose doubts had been dispelled."

Vic is star struck, or in other words it's called idol worship

Schabesbert
08-16-2011, 10:14
As opposed to the Roman Catholic Docrine of instead of scripture. Or perhaps, scripture is incovenient, so let's just simply contravene, change or deny it altogether as the mood of the church suits?
It always shows that someone has lost the argument when they have to resort to lying and distorting their opponent's beliefs in order to make a point.

Vic Hays
08-16-2011, 13:27
EW is a liar, the proof has been laid out many times, it only takes 1 time being wrong to be considered a liar and false prophet to God.

Vic can you sit here and say EW was right 100% of the time?

If you can't you need to discard all her teachings.

If you think she was, you are among the blind and deceived by satan and really need prayed for by the members on this forum.
[/SIZE]

Achey

Accusations without specific facts are not becoming a Christian or even to any fair minded person.
If you care to go back I responded to all of your accusations from all the hate sites you copied them from. You struck out. Not even one of the accusations you brought was valid. Your opinion does not count as proof.

Jesus himself was and is considered by many to be a false prophet. I consider Jesus to be my Lord and Savior. Demonizing and slandering God's servants does not make them bad, it makes you liable for judgment.

Ellen White always pointed to Jesus and to the Bible as being the rule of faith and practice. Do you consider this wrong? All of the true prophets and Jesus have been derided and even killed by those who had opinions about them.

I know that you learned Christianity from Herbert Armstrong which explains your phobia of prophets. The Bible assures us that here are true as well as false prophets.

Here is a link to the Ellen White estate. You can look up most of the objections that you have been posting if you need your memory refreshed. She has been an absolute blessing from God to the Adventist Church.

http://www.whiteestate.org/search/search.asp

God bless you

achysklic
08-16-2011, 13:54
Achey

Accusations without specific facts are not becoming a Christian or even to any fair minded person.
If you care to go back I responded to all of your accusations from all the hate sites you copied them from. You struck out. Not even one of the accusations you brought was valid. Your opinion does not count as proof.

Jesus himself was and is considered by many to be a false prophet. I consider Jesus to be my Lord and Savior. Demonizing and slandering God's servants does not make them bad, it makes you liable for judgment.

Ellen White always pointed to Jesus and to the Bible as being the rule of faith and practice. Do you consider this wrong? All of the true prophets and Jesus have been derided and even killed by those who had opinions about them.

I know that you learned Christianity from Herbert Armstrong which explains your phobia of prophets. The Bible assures us that here are true as well as false prophets.

Here is a link to the Ellen White estate. You can look up most of the objections that you have been posting if you need your memory refreshed. She has been an absolute blessing from God to the Adventist Church.

http://www.whiteestate.org/search/search.asp

God bless you


Vic you are killing me how to side step and come up with the rubbish you do.

You have given your opinion on everything I posted and I proved it all wrong.

I can't believe you can sit and say that EW was right 100% OF THE TIME.

I am offended when you compare her to Jesus or any of the prophets in the Bible.

You speak out you butt way to often. First you say she never claimed to be a prophet then you keep comparing her to the prophets in the Bible.

Which is it dear confused one?

And to claim I have had anything to do with armstrong is doing what you keep accusing me of (accusing the brethern).

Vic to be frank, I think armstrong was a nut...he molested his daughter. So please never say I have anything to do with him again.

As to me accusing the brethern, sorry I don't consider people whom follow false idols brethern.

Roering
08-16-2011, 16:05
I'm hesitant to speak ill of her as I really don't know how complicit she was in this propaganda or to what extent she was the one actually doing the writing but some of the things she allegedly wrote are not only wrong but in some cases hateful. It is my hope that SDA's either are not familiar enough with her writings or take them with a big grain of salt. If they claim she is a prophet fine, I just hope they stick with the teaching's of Christ and not what is allegedly hers.

Vic Hays
08-16-2011, 17:32
I'm hesitant to speak ill of her as I really don't know how complicit she was in this propaganda or to what extent she was the one actually doing the writing but some of the things she allegedly wrote are not only wrong but in some cases hateful. It is my hope that SDA's either are not familiar enough with her writings or take them with a big grain of salt. If they claim she is a prophet fine, I just hope they stick with the teaching's of Christ and not what is allegedly hers.

Roering

Yes, I stick with the Bible.

I can understand your point of view by calling Ellen White hateful.
I see her as honest.

You are a Catholic and believe that those in authority over you should have authority over your conscience and thoughts. Ellen White is Protestant and writes from a Protestant view of freedom of conscience and belief.

Some of her writings include historical accounts that put the Inquisition and the Roman Catholic Church in a bad light because of the brutality and authoritarian way they treated people.

Here is a sample from the book The Great Controversy. Some may think it is hateful and some may think it is historically correct.


http://www.whiteestate.org/
The Great Controversy, Page 203
"The imperial party were convinced that the Christian princes would adhere to the Holy Scriptures as superior to human doctrines and requirements; and they knew that wherever this principle was accepted, the papacy would eventually be overthrown. But, like thousands since their time, looking only “at the things which are seen,” they flattered themselves that the cause of the emperor and the pope was strong, and that of the Reformers weak. Had the Reformers depended upon human aid alone, they would have been as powerless as the papists supposed. But though weak in numbers, and at variance with Rome, they had their strength. They appealed “from the report of the Diet to the word of God, and from the emperor Charles to Jesus Christ, the King of kings and Lord of lords.”—Ibid., b. 13, ch. 6.

As Ferdinand had refused to regard their conscientious convictions, the princes decided not to heed his absence, but to bring their Protest before the national council without delay. A solemn declaration was therefore drawn up and presented to the Diet:

“We protest by these presents, before God, our only Creator, Preserver, Redeemer, and Saviour, and who will one day be our Judge, as well as before all men and all creatures, that we, for us and for our people, neither consent

nor adhere in any manner whatsoever to the proposed decree, in anything that is contrary to God, to His holy word, to our right conscience, to the salvation of our souls.”

“What! we ratify this edict! We assert that when Almighty God calls a man to His knowledge, this man nevertheless cannot receive the knowledge of God!” “There is no sure doctrine but such as is conformable to the word of God.... The Lord forbids the teaching of any other doctrine.... The Holy Scriptures ought to be explained by other and clearer texts; ... this Holy Book is, in all things necessary for the Christian, easy of understanding, and calculated to scatter the darkness. We are resolved, with the grace of God, to maintain the pure and exclusive preaching of His only word, such as it is contained in the biblical books of the Old and New Testaments, without adding anything thereto that may be contrary to it. This word is the only truth; it is the sure rule of all doctrine and of all life, and can never fail or deceive us. He who builds on this foundation shall stand against all the powers of hell, while all the human vanities that are set up against it shall fall before the face of God.”

“For this reason we reject the yoke that is imposed on us.” “At the same time we are in expectation that his imperial majesty will behave toward us like a Christian prince who loves God above all things; and we declare ourselves ready to pay unto him, as well as unto you, gracious lords, all the affection and obedience that are our just and legitimate duty.”—Ibid., b. 13, ch. 6.

A deep impression was made upon the Diet. The majority were filled with amazement and alarm at the boldness of the protesters. The future appeared to them stormy and uncertain. Dissension, strife, and bloodshed seemed inevitable. But the Reformers, assured of the justice of their cause, and relying upon the arm of Omnipotence, were “full of courage and firmness.”

“The principles contained in this celebrated Protest ... constitute the very essence of Protestantism. Now this Protest opposes two abuses of man in matters of faith: the first is

The Great Controversy, Page 204
the intrusion of the civil magistrate, and the second the arbitrary authority of the church. Instead of these abuses, Protestantism sets the power of conscience above the magistrate, and the authority of the word of God above the visible church. In the first place, it rejects the civil power in divine things, and says with the prophets and apostles, ‘We must obey God rather than man.’ In presence of the crown of Charles the Fifth, it uplifts the crown of Jesus Christ. But it goes farther: it lays down the principle that all human teaching should be subordinate to the oracles of God.”—Ibid., b. 13, ch. 6. The protesters had moreover affirmed their right to utter freely their convictions of truth. They would not only believe and obey, but teach what the word of God presents, and they denied the right of priest or magistrate to interfere. The Protest of Spires was a solemn witness against religious intolerance, and an assertion of the right of all men to worship God according to the dictates of their own consciences.

The declaration had been made. It was written in the memory of thousands and registered in the books of heaven, where no effort of man could erase it. All evangelical Germany adopted the Protest as the expression of its faith. Everywhere men beheld in this declaration the promise of a new and better era. Said one of the princes to the Protestants of Spires: “May the Almighty, who has given you grace to confess energetically, freely, and fearlessly, preserve you in that Christian firmness until the day of eternity.”—Ibid., b. 13, ch. 6.

Had the Reformation, after attaining a degree of success, consented to temporize to secure favor with the world, it would have been untrue to God and to itself, and would thus have ensured its own destruction. The experience of these noble Reformers contains a lesson for all succeeding ages. Satan’s manner of working against God and His word has not changed; he is still as much opposed to the Scriptures being made the guide of life as in the sixteenth century. In our time there is a wide departure from their doctrines and precepts, and there is need of a return to the great Protestant

The Great Controversy, Page 205
principle—the Bible, and the Bible only, as the rule of faith and duty. Satan is still working through every means which he can control to destroy religious liberty. The antichristian power which the protesters of Spires rejected is now with renewed vigor seeking to re-establish its lost supremacy. The same unswerving adherence to the word of God manifested at that crisis of the Reformation is the only hope of reform today."


Each person will have to make their own decisions and will stand alone before the judgment seat of Christ.

Roering
08-16-2011, 18:40
Roering

Yes, I stick with the Bible.

I can understand your point of view by calling Ellen White hateful.
I see her as honest.

You are a Catholic and believe that those in authority over you should have authority over your conscience and thoughts. Ellen White is Protestant and writes from a Protestant view of freedom of conscience and belief.

Some of her writings include historical accounts that put the Inquisition and the Roman Catholic Church in a bad light because of the brutality and authoritarian way they treated people.

Here is a sample from the book The Great Controversy. Some may think it is hateful and some may think it is historically correct.


http://www.whiteestate.org/
The Great Controversy, Page 203
"The imperial party were convinced that the Christian princes would adhere to the Holy Scriptures as superior to human doctrines and requirements; and they knew that wherever this principle was accepted, the papacy would eventually be overthrown. But, like thousands since their time, looking only “at the things which are seen,” they flattered themselves that the cause of the emperor and the pope was strong, and that of the Reformers weak. Had the Reformers depended upon human aid alone, they would have been as powerless as the papists supposed. But though weak in numbers, and at variance with Rome, they had their strength. They appealed “from the report of the Diet to the word of God, and from the emperor Charles to Jesus Christ, the King of kings and Lord of lords.”—Ibid., b. 13, ch. 6.

As Ferdinand had refused to regard their conscientious convictions, the princes decided not to heed his absence, but to bring their Protest before the national council without delay. A solemn declaration was therefore drawn up and presented to the Diet:

“We protest by these presents, before God, our only Creator, Preserver, Redeemer, and Saviour, and who will one day be our Judge, as well as before all men and all creatures, that we, for us and for our people, neither consent

nor adhere in any manner whatsoever to the proposed decree, in anything that is contrary to God, to His holy word, to our right conscience, to the salvation of our souls.”

“What! we ratify this edict! We assert that when Almighty God calls a man to His knowledge, this man nevertheless cannot receive the knowledge of God!” “There is no sure doctrine but such as is conformable to the word of God.... The Lord forbids the teaching of any other doctrine.... The Holy Scriptures ought to be explained by other and clearer texts; ... this Holy Book is, in all things necessary for the Christian, easy of understanding, and calculated to scatter the darkness. We are resolved, with the grace of God, to maintain the pure and exclusive preaching of His only word, such as it is contained in the biblical books of the Old and New Testaments, without adding anything thereto that may be contrary to it. This word is the only truth; it is the sure rule of all doctrine and of all life, and can never fail or deceive us. He who builds on this foundation shall stand against all the powers of hell, while all the human vanities that are set up against it shall fall before the face of God.”

“For this reason we reject the yoke that is imposed on us.” “At the same time we are in expectation that his imperial majesty will behave toward us like a Christian prince who loves God above all things; and we declare ourselves ready to pay unto him, as well as unto you, gracious lords, all the affection and obedience that are our just and legitimate duty.”—Ibid., b. 13, ch. 6.

A deep impression was made upon the Diet. The majority were filled with amazement and alarm at the boldness of the protesters. The future appeared to them stormy and uncertain. Dissension, strife, and bloodshed seemed inevitable. But the Reformers, assured of the justice of their cause, and relying upon the arm of Omnipotence, were “full of courage and firmness.”

“The principles contained in this celebrated Protest ... constitute the very essence of Protestantism. Now this Protest opposes two abuses of man in matters of faith: the first is

The Great Controversy, Page 204
the intrusion of the civil magistrate, and the second the arbitrary authority of the church. Instead of these abuses, Protestantism sets the power of conscience above the magistrate, and the authority of the word of God above the visible church. In the first place, it rejects the civil power in divine things, and says with the prophets and apostles, ‘We must obey God rather than man.’ In presence of the crown of Charles the Fifth, it uplifts the crown of Jesus Christ. But it goes farther: it lays down the principle that all human teaching should be subordinate to the oracles of God.”—Ibid., b. 13, ch. 6. The protesters had moreover affirmed their right to utter freely their convictions of truth. They would not only believe and obey, but teach what the word of God presents, and they denied the right of priest or magistrate to interfere. The Protest of Spires was a solemn witness against religious intolerance, and an assertion of the right of all men to worship God according to the dictates of their own consciences.

The declaration had been made. It was written in the memory of thousands and registered in the books of heaven, where no effort of man could erase it. All evangelical Germany adopted the Protest as the expression of its faith. Everywhere men beheld in this declaration the promise of a new and better era. Said one of the princes to the Protestants of Spires: “May the Almighty, who has given you grace to confess energetically, freely, and fearlessly, preserve you in that Christian firmness until the day of eternity.”—Ibid., b. 13, ch. 6.

Had the Reformation, after attaining a degree of success, consented to temporize to secure favor with the world, it would have been untrue to God and to itself, and would thus have ensured its own destruction. The experience of these noble Reformers contains a lesson for all succeeding ages. Satan’s manner of working against God and His word has not changed; he is still as much opposed to the Scriptures being made the guide of life as in the sixteenth century. In our time there is a wide departure from their doctrines and precepts, and there is need of a return to the great Protestant

The Great Controversy, Page 205
principle—the Bible, and the Bible only, as the rule of faith and duty. Satan is still working through every means which he can control to destroy religious liberty. The antichristian power which the protesters of Spires rejected is now with renewed vigor seeking to re-establish its lost supremacy. The same unswerving adherence to the word of God manifested at that crisis of the Reformation is the only hope of reform today."


Each person will have to make their own decisions and will stand alone before the judgment seat of Christ.

See what I mean. She (if it was her writing) didn't even understand the Catholics relationship with the Church.

True union was evidently foreign to her.

I was thinking more in terms of statements made contrary to teaching in scripture though but this also shows my point.

Ogreon
08-17-2011, 01:07
An SDA organization sent out a booklet condensed from Ellen White's writings. The little that I had the time to read seemed to be too heavily distilled from Milton. Some of the quotes I've seen about Catholics and the Pope seemed over the top. Other than that I don't know much about her and make no judgment.

If the Pope were forced to sit and listen to my jokes for a few minutes, he might be tempted to have his Swiss Guard turn me into Swiss cheese. I strongly doubt, however, that he is plotting to chain me up and beat me until I accept his universal and immediate jurisdiction. I don't think he's going to make our President kiss his foot.

Maybe I'm just a dupe, but the dude looks like grandpa...I don't get the fear.

Vic Hays
08-17-2011, 08:12
An SDA organization sent out a booklet condensed from Ellen White's writings. The little that I had the time to read seemed to be too heavily distilled from Milton. Some of the quotes I've seen about Catholics and the Pope seemed over the top. Other than that I don't know much about her and make no judgment.

If the Pope were forced to sit and listen to my jokes for a few minutes, he might be tempted to have his Swiss Guard turn me into Swiss cheese. I strongly doubt, however, that he is plotting to chain me up and beat me until I accept his universal and immediate jurisdiction. I don't think he's going to make our President kiss his foot.

Maybe I'm just a dupe, but the dude looks like grandpa...I don't get the fear.

Their purpose is to control the world. Maybe you don't think they can do it, but in the past they had it sewed up for a thousand years plus. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. It was only the Protestant reformation that broke the hold on the worlds politicians and people. Bibles make Protestants.

Vic Hays
08-17-2011, 08:32
See what I mean. She (if it was her writing) didn't even understand the Catholics relationship with the Church.

True union was evidently foreign to her.

I was thinking more in terms of statements made contrary to teaching in scripture though but this also shows my point.

I really appreciate you Roering. True union, unity is one Christian principle that Jesus prayed for His followers in John 17:11 ......."That they may be one as We are."

The Catholic Church has this agenda that all Christians be one. This is a Bible principle.

You hoped that the Adventist people would stick with the principles of Christ's teachings. Thank you for your hope and confidence in Christians not of your faith.

Adventists believe in unity also, but around the Bible and not around human authority. It is a great thing to be an Adventist and stand for truth amid a corrupt world.

The problem with unity based upon human authority is that unity is maintained by force, not truth.

Simply put, unity by force violates other Christian principle taught by Christ like free will, truth, and taking up your cross and following Him.

"You will know the Truth and the Truth will set you free."

Roering
08-17-2011, 09:45
An SDA organization sent out a booklet condensed from Ellen White's writings. The little that I had the time to read seemed to be too heavily distilled from Milton. Some of the quotes I've seen about Catholics and the Pope seemed over the top. Other than that I don't know much about her and make no judgment.

If the Pope were forced to sit and listen to my jokes for a few minutes, he might be tempted to have his Swiss Guard turn me into Swiss cheese. I strongly doubt, however, that he is plotting to chain me up and beat me until I accept his universal and immediate jurisdiction. I don't think he's going to make our President kiss his foot.

Maybe I'm just a dupe, but the dude looks like grandpa...I don't get the fear.

She lived in a time when this country was very anti Catholic. Propaganda of this type was written by a lot of people. They cashed in on the people's prejudice and fears.

And Vic,
As for union by force, people leave the Church all the time. Former Catholics are a pretty large demographic.

Schabesbert
08-17-2011, 11:46
You are a Catholic and believe that those in authority over you should have authority over your conscience and thoughts. Ellen White is Protestant and writes from a Protestant view of freedom of conscience and belief.

...


Each person will have to make their own decisions and will stand alone before the judgment seat of Christ.

Where have I heard that before?

Oh, yeah:

Jg 17:6 In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did what was right in his own eyes.

Jg 21:25 In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did what was right in his own eyes.

... referring, of course, to the admonition from Moses:
De 12:8 You shall not do according to all that we are doing here this day, every man doing whatever is right in his own eyes;

So, Vic, you're advocating returning to one of the sins that Israel was committing.

Schabesbert
08-17-2011, 11:46
Their purpose is to control the world.
To quote a subsequent post of YOURS: "The Catholic Church has this agenda that all Christians be one. This is a Bible principle."

Maybe you don't think they can do it, but in the past they had it sewed up for a thousand years plus. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. It was only the Protestant reformation that broke the hold on the worlds politicians and people. Bibles make Protestants.
Really? What thousand year period would that be?

Are you seriously unaware of the problems that the Church had in that period? For example: do you know how many popes were kidnapped? Why did the popes reside at Avignon for 73 years?

Who is teaching you your cockamamie views of history and religion?

I know you don't answer questions when they will show just how wrong you are. The last time you tried, for instance, showed that you do not actually believe that the Gospels are true (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=17753117&postcount=167).


Here's another example, which has been going on for years now:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays
These claims of authority even go against what Jesus taught about authority.

Matthew 22:25-26 ............. "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authoritynover them, Yet it shall not be so among you"...........................................................

You keep using this quote for this purpose, I keep telling you why this doesn't support your premise, and you ignore the point and blithely make the same mistake a while later.

Your quote involves Jesus' instructions to His disciples about how they are to handle the Authority that He is about to give them. In order for them to handle the Authority justly (without "lord[ing] it over" others), they need to have been given Authority. So this proves just the opposite of what it is you posit.

Vic Hays
08-17-2011, 13:14
She lived in a time when this country was very anti Catholic. Propaganda of this type was written by a lot of people. They cashed in on the people's prejudice and fears.

And Vic,
As for union by force, people leave the Church all the time. Former Catholics are a pretty large demographic.

Ellen White lived at a time when people still remembered the persecution in the Old world that drove people to seek religious liberty. The Truths of the Bible were a threat to the establishment in Europe that were Roman Catholic.

That is what all this inquisition stuff was about for 1200 years.
If people taught anything other than the party line they were to be penalized even sometimes to death.

The biggest problem is that the Catholic Church considers anyone who is baptized to be Catholic and therefore subject to Catholic church discipline.

The Office of the Inquisition still exists. It has just changed its name. Ratzinger was the head until he was elected as Pope.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congregation_for_the_Doctrine_of_the_Faith
On July 21, 1542, Pope Paul III proclaimed the Licet ab initio Apostolic Constitution, establishing the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition, staffed by cardinals and other officials whose task it was "to maintain and defend the integrity of the faith and to examine and proscribe errors and false doctrines". It served as the final court of appeal in trials of heresy and served as an important part of the Counter-Reformation.

Vic Hays
08-17-2011, 13:29
Maybe I'm just a dupe, but the dude looks like grandpa...I don't get the fear.

This quote from me is one that Schabesbert just posted:

"To quote a subsequent post of YOURS: "The Catholic Church has this agenda that all Christians be one. This is a Bible principle."

The problem is that they intend to do it by any means possible and they can be quite subtle. Bert neglected the other Bible principles like free will and Truth by taking my quote out of context.

To a Catholic Truth is what the Catholic church says it is. The words of Jesus are interpreted only by the Catholic Church.

Schabesbert
08-17-2011, 14:00
This quote from me is one that Schabesbert just posted:

"To quote a subsequent post of YOURS: "The Catholic Church has this agenda that all Christians be one. This is a Bible principle."

The problem is that they intend to do it by any means possible and they can be quite subtle. Bert neglected the other Bible principles like free will and Truth by taking my quote out of context.

To a Catholic Truth is what the Catholic church says it is. The words of Jesus are interpreted only by the Catholic Church.
To Vic, the Truth is ... irrelevant.
:ufo:

Roering
08-17-2011, 14:56
To a Catholic Truth is what the Catholic church says it is. The words of Jesus are interpreted only by the Catholic Church.

Anyone who reads scripture interprets it, but yes when it comes to authority of interpretation we defer to the Church. To me it makes sense to do so rather than to throw out 2000 years of collective knowledge and just start from scratch on my own.

Roering
08-17-2011, 14:58
Ellen White lived at a time when people still remembered the persecution in the Old world that drove people to seek religious liberty.

I thought she lived in the 1800's? Did I miss something?

achysklic
08-17-2011, 15:12
I thought she lived in the 1800's? Did I miss something?


Not only is she a prophet, she was a God the the sda's this explains her time traveling. Or else she met up with Doc. and took a ride in the Delorean.

Vic Hays
08-17-2011, 19:21
Anyone who reads scripture interprets it, but yes when it comes to authority of interpretation we defer to the Church. To me it makes sense to do so rather than to throw out 2000 years of collective knowledge and just start from scratch on my own.

When the Jesus speaks clearly and the church contradicts it, who are you supposed to believe.

For example: both Roering and Bert say this following scripture means that Jesus is the wise builder:

Matthew 7:24 "Therefore whoever hears these sayings of mine and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock.

Roering
08-17-2011, 21:46
When the Jesus speaks clearly and the church contradicts it, who are you supposed to believe.

For example: both Roering and Bert say this following scripture means that Jesus is the wise builder:

Matthew 7:24 "Therefore whoever hears these sayings of mine and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock.

I've never commented on that passage Vic. But I'll go with Jesus using an analogy. Like it says, I will liken him to a wise builder.

Question for you though. According to scripture, who is it that you believe bears our sins?

Vic Hays
08-18-2011, 00:23
I've never commented on that passage Vic. But I'll go with Jesus using an analogy. Like it says, I will liken him to a wise builder.

Question for you though. According to scripture, who is it that you believe bears our sins?

Sorry, it was Bert who commented on Mathew 7:24

That is a strange question to ask a Christian, who is the sin bearer?
I suspect you have heard some strange tale about the scapegoat and want to find out.

Jesus died for our sins and is the sin bearer. He will not bear those sins forever, however. Heaven has a plan to deal with all those forgiven sins.

According to the Bible Jesus died and is the sin bearer until just before the second coming. At that time the heavenly sanctuary is cleansed of all the forgiven sins by the blood of Christ. satan must bear the blame for those sins because they occured as a result of his rebellion.

Scripture to back this up: Notice that the sanctuary in heaven is purified with the blood of Christ who then returns without sin.

Hebrews 9:23-28 Therfore it was necessary that the copies of the things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another- He would then have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear the second time, apart from sin, for salvation.

The Old Testament type of the yearly cleansing of the sanctuary Leviticus 16referred to in Hebrews 9 includes the two goats. The Lord's goat and the scape goat. The Lord's goat is sacrificed and its blood cleanses the sanctuary of sin. Those sins are then placed upon the scape goat which is not sacrificed. Jesus returns without sin because the blame for all of the forgiven sins will be placed upon satan. Unforgiven sins are upon those who commited them.

Leviticus 16:7-9 "He shall take the two goats and present them before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle of meeting. Then Aaron shall cast lots for the two goats: one lot for the Lord and the other lot for the scapegoat. And Aaron shall bring the goat on which the Lord's lot fell, and offer it as a sin offering.

Then the sins from the sanctuary are placed upon the scapegoat. the scapegoat is not sacrificed, but bears all of the sins that were forgiven and transferred to the sanctuary to an uninhabited land.

Leviticus 16:20-23 And when he has made an end of atoning for the Holy Place, the tabernacle of meeting, and the altar, he shall bring the live goat. Aaron shall lay both hands on the head of the live goat, confess over it all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all of their transgressions, concerning all their sins, putting them on the head of the goat, and shall send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a suitable man. The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to an uninhabited land; and he shall release the goat in the wilderness.

Schabesbert
08-18-2011, 09:41
When the Jesus speaks clearly and the church contradicts it, who are you supposed to believe.
That's like saying, when the Gospel of Matthew speaks clearly, and the 1st letter of St. John contradicts it, who are you supposed to bellieve.

The correct answer is that both must somehow be true.

For example: both Roering and Bert say this following scripture means that Jesus is the wise builder:
Neither I nor Roering are empowered to speak officially for the Church.

But you're still wrong.

And you still haven't explained why you don't believe the Gospels (see the link in post 237 (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=17789519&postcount=237)above). You offered the theory that the Gospels were tampered with (without, of course, anything like evidence) as an explanation for the Petrine primacy which is shown in scripture.

Roering
08-18-2011, 10:03
According to the Bible Jesus died and is the sin bearer until just before the second coming. At that time the heavenly sanctuary is cleansed of all the forgiven sins by the blood of Christ. satan must bear the blame for those sins because they occured as a result of his rebellion.

Does it say anywhere in scripture that satan will bear our sins?

Ogreon
08-18-2011, 12:51
Ellen White lived at a time when people still remembered the persecution in the Old world that drove people to seek religious liberty. The Truths of the Bible were a threat to the establishment in Europe that were Roman Catholic.


My recollection is that most of the people who came here, like my ancestors, came from Protestant countries. Catholic immigrants started coming later, to great fear and consternation from many local Protestants.

It seems odd that the Catholic immigrants, if they were fleeing Catholic oppression, would come here and remain Catholic.

The only reason that I do expect the Spanish Inquisition, is that it prevents Michael Palin from bursting through my door.

Roering
08-18-2011, 13:08
My recollection is that most of the people who came here, like my ancestors, came from Protestant countries. Catholic immigrants started coming later, to great fear and consternation from many local Protestants.

It seems odd that the Catholic immigrants, if they were fleeing Catholic oppression, would come here and remain Catholic.

The only reason that I do expect the Spanish Inquisition, is that it prevents Michael Palin from bursting through my door.

Many came to get away from fellow Protestants i.e. the Church of England. But that doesn't fit Vic's model of history I guess.