NCT and the Sabbath Question

don · 08-18-09 12:43 am

In 1850, Bates published a tract on the sanctuary (I have not been able to find an original of Bates tract. Both Canright and Nichols quote from it.) see this post for background: <a href="http://www.atomorrow.net/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=28&post=6345#POST6345" target=_top>http://www.atomorrow.net/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?t pc=28&post=6345#POST6345</a> ______________________________________ Here are the main URL's from the two sides of the debate about Bates' influence on the Whites: Against Ellen White<blockquote>"Life of Mrs. E.G. White - Her Claims Refuted" by D.M. Canright (1919) <a href="http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/canright/egw16.htm" target=_top>http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/canright/egw16.ht m</a> Chapter 7 - The Shut Door, Or Probation For Sinners Ended Oct. 22, 1844 <a href="http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/canright/can7.htm" target=_top>http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/canright/can7.htm</a></blockquote>For Ellen White<blockquote>Ellen G. White and Her Critics by F. D. Nichol (1951) <a href="http://www.whiteestate.org/books/egwhc/egwhctoc.html" target=_top>http://www.whiteestate.org/books/egwhc/egwhctoc.ht ml</a> Chapter 16, Time Setting - The Seven Year Theory <a href="http://www.whiteestate.org/books/egwhc/EGWHCc16.html#c16" target=_top>http://www.whiteestate.org/books/egwhc/EGWHCc16.ht ml#c16</a></blockquote>What are the facts to which both sides can agree?<blockquote>1. Bates did believe in a seven year time ending in 1851.</blockquote>(Perhaps we can work together to identify the agreed upon facts in the debate over the next few days.) .

cadge · 08-18-09 12:27 pm

"You see, the "vision" of Hiram Edson and the visions of Ellen white were not from our eternal heavenly Father. Jesus did not enter the Most Holy in 1844 for the marriage as Edson says and no vision was given by God to Ellen White of people that rejected the messages of 1844 to 1851 to have fallen of the path and never able to get back on. These "visions" were images projected by satan. It can't be any other way". It's quite apparent that hese visions did not come from God. "My accompanying angel bade me look for the travail of souls for sinners as used to be. I LOOKED BUT COULD NOT SEE IT FOR THE TIME FOR THEIR SALVATION IS PAST. Dear Brother and Sister, I have now written the vision God gave me. I am tired sitting so long. Our position looks very clear. WE KNOW WE HAVE THE TRUTH, THE MIDNIGHT CRY IS BEHIND US, THE DOOR WAS SHUT IN 1844 AND JESUS IS SOON TO STEP OUT FROM BETWEEN GOD AND MAN." Letter 5-1849, White Estate, (March 24-30, 1849) He wrote: "The light behind them (Millerites who did not become Adventists) went out leaving their feet in perfect darkness, and they stumbled and got their eyes off the mark and lost sight of Jesus, and fell off the path down in the dark and wicked world below. It was just as impossible for them to get on the path again and go to the City, as all the wicked world which God had rejected." Ellen G. White, A Word to the Little Flock, p. 14. How did Jesus say that we would find His people? Will you "know them" by their politness?, no. By their occupational professions?, no. By their college degrees?,no. By how they dress?, no. By their material gains?,no? By their denomination?,no. By their health message?,no. By their doctrine?,no. How then? "By their fruits ye shall know them". The Body of our Lord can be found and the Gospel understood by both the brilliant and the simple. They are a "city" set on a hill that giveth their light unto all men. They lay down their lives providing for each others needs in common as our Saviour demonstrated as is "the Life" and "the light". They do not live individualistically in self sufficiency. That was the spirit of the evil one that brought division in heaven. Jesus prayed that His people would be one, they in Him and He in they as He and the Father are. The 144,000 can only come out of a body that is of one heart and one mind with Him. They can't be a body in division. Hereby we percieve the love of God, because he laid down His life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. 1 John 3:16 1John 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things [that are] in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 1John 2:16 For all that [is] in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. 2Cr 6:16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in [them]; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 2Cr 6:17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean [thing]; and I will receive you, 2Cr 6:18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. John 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. John 15:14 Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you. Matthew 7:15 ¶ Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Matthew 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Matthew 7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. Matthew 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Matthew 7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Matthew 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. <a href="http://twelvetribes.org/audio/audioplayer2.html" target=_top>http://twelvetribes.org/audio/audioplayer2.html</a> try #'s 1,7,11

john8verse32 · 08-18-09 1:45 pm

too bad Sister White didn't have a Casio calculator, or she would have realized that the dream she had of 144,000 virgin guys standing 379.47331 per side in a perfect square, was both a mathemagical impossibility, and a superstitious use of numerology. 12 = the number of constellations rotating overhead the flat earth...the WHOLE NIGHT LONG.. and thus became the number representing completeness", the whole night long... the complete number of anything you need... like sons, tribes, walls, gates, deciples, the biggest number reacheable on dice. and just like the ancients used multiplication to increase the validity of their symbols, 12 sets of 12 would be even more complete. and then if you wanted to indicate that the number represented not only the ancients who believed in the numerology of 12, you could borrow the largest number the Romans had at the time, and multiply 1000 x 12 x 12.... and thereby indicate that the number to be saved saved was a thousand times completely complete.....a figurative concept. just like we are supposed to forgive people 70 x 7... 7 being the divine number of planets and sun and moon visible to the nakkid eye wandering around under the "dome",,,, and multiplying 7 times itself makes the product doubly divine, and then multiplying times the Roman 10 makes the result available to the whole world, not just the Hebrews. is that why Jesus picked 12 apostles (the complete number) to minister to the Hebrews, but graduated to "70" (the divine 7 times the Roman 10) when He wanted them to go abroad and spread the hebrew word of Jesus new kingdom to those outside the Hebrew world? more superstitious numerology? 42 kids killed by bears 42 ancestors in Matts gerrymandered geneology 42 months taken as a prophecy where 42 = 3 sets of double 7 the ubiquitous "40" seems to represent two sets of 20... twenty being the base number used by ancient nomads who went barefoot or wore sandals and could count on both their fingers AND toes. while the Romans counted on base 10...often wearing shoes or boots to trek around the empire, leaving only their fingers to count on. 40 was probably the highest number that two ignorant goat herders could count between them on their combined digits, and it passed into usage meaning...."as many as we can count"..... EGW's usage of a figurative concept but as a literal number, for which the square root didn't even work, does not seem to support her claim of divine inspiration!!! mof, it undermines it and much confidence in anything else she claimed.

elaine · 08-18-09 5:30 pm

People who read the Bible literally, should be aware of the danger, as illustrated by John. If all the numbers were accurate, what a mess! No understanding of symbolic language or metaphor or the writer's creative imagination. Most of the numbers in the Bible were used to illustrate and magnify the "glorious" Hebrew history. Never mind that most of it is the figment of human imagination and few evidences have ever been found to document these fantastical stories.

elaine · 08-18-09 5:34 pm

It is quite amazing that people who readily accept that at one time in the distant past, serpents and donkeys could talk; that waters could inundate Mt. Everest; that more than a million former slaves survived in the Sinai (anyone been there, it's much like Death Valley)with not a sign of their existence; that the grand and glorious "kingdom" and palace of Solomon has never been found (only a rude hut). Yet, not one of these people have personally observed any of these "miraculous" events today. IOW: if it's in the Bible it is true. Regardless of no one's ever having observed such evidence.

bob_2 · 08-18-09 10:01 pm

Question Elaine: What are you wanting to turn us into or to believe. Let's hear your version and let's see if it is more believeable. Your assumptions are showing like Everest existed at the Flood not as a result of it. One trick pony's are like what you continue to claim, literalist or nothing. I realize that they weren't the scientist of our postmodern world and the world was different, read a little John Baumgardner on catastrophic plate tectonics. <a href="http://www.globalflood.org/papers/2003ICCcpt.html" target=_top>http://www.globalflood.org/papers/2003ICCcpt.html</a> Let you mind expand with other than your imagined possibilities. Fresno ain't the only place on earth, consider what it would be like if we only took ideas generated in that town as truth, eh???

lijhakim · 08-18-09 10:02 pm

The preaching of Christ is to the Jews a stumbling block, and to the Greeks foolishness.

elaine · 08-18-09 10:53 pm

Bob, you can believe the moon is made of cheese. Just don't try to convince others that it is so by the evidence you have gathered. FYI, I have probably traveled and lived in more states than you, and have visited more foreign countries that you, so because I live in Fresno means nothing for evaluating me. Only naive folks depend on opinions of any one place, and more particularly, of any one individual.

john8verse32 · 08-19-09 9:00 am

Bob...why not look up the <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=geology+mt+everest&aq=f&oq=&aqi=" target="_blank">...Geology of MtEverest...</a> you might be interested to learn that its well over 4500 yrs old...ie, it was NOT raised up in 2500BC.....

john8verse32 · 08-19-09 9:30 am

mof, the bulldozing of India into Asia continues to this day...at a very slow, constant rate, which confirms the long time (50+ million years)it took for the Himalaya to be raised up... Baumgartner's "rapid" catastrophic plate tetonics just does not explain that, or where all the heat went which was produced by the alleged rapid radiation decay necessary to use radio dating to prove the young earth!!! <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CD/CD750.html" target=_top>http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CD/CD750.html</a> you might want to try to find another explanation than bad science. Just claim that God did it, and it was a miracle. Some people will believe that. not anybody who has studied geology. or philosophy. because it will be impossible to justify from a philosophical viewpoint why our heavenly father, who created us in his image, and who loves us, suddenly claimed He was sorry He had made people, because space aliens were coming down and interbreeding with the fairest of women...so He tried to kill them all with a flood...and in the process massacred the little kids, unjudged people, and innocent animals in a flood, leaving behind less than valid evidence or justification. Isn't it better for Gods rep to accept that the Hebrews may have exaggerated some things in their Family History, and that God never deliberately tried to massacre humankind... but God allowed the earth to wobble like a Milankovitch top, causing cyclical warming and cooling, glaciation and melting, causing raising ocean levels, remembered by stone age people as a "world wide flood". if we choose to blame Mother Nature for the worlds problems, we can still have our loving, heavenly father. otoh, how to keep that loving feeling when our Father is said to be trying to kill everybody?

bob_2 · 08-19-09 9:52 pm

John, I gave up on some of your concerns when you don't take in to account the dating flaws and rely on uniformitarianism and macroevolution that doesn't have proof. Your cavern in the South of France no one else seems to be concerned about except you, unless you can cite where someone else indicates it helps with proof of Deep Time.

bob_2 · 08-19-09 9:57 pm

Elaine, as a "literalist", where did I talk about the moon being made of cheese?? Oh you were metaphorically speaking, why not let others discern when literal is the mode and metephor is. Or, are you in control of that, from Fresno. [I'm thinking of putting my signature quote back up, Elaine, to see if you read the whole Bible as Neal seemed to think was important] (Message edited by Bob_2 on August 19, 2009)

elaine · 08-19-09 10:09 pm

Bob, you didn't. Nor did I accuse you of such. But because you "believe" certain things about how the earth came to be when you have no definite proof, it is only a belief or opinion and that means subjective, as opposed to objective, which is accepted by major authorities. If you rely on the Bible for all your information in all disciplines, why did you bother getting an education (or did you).

bob_2 · 08-19-09 11:45 pm

Major authorities is it. Come on Elaine, since when is that the way we establish our doctrine???

elaine · 08-20-09 4:05 pm

Bob, do you know the origin of your Christian beliefs such as the Trinity, human-divine nature of Christ, Virgin Birth These "doctrines" took more than four centuries of long arguments and discussions, until finally, Emperor Theodsius (who WAS the authority in that day) in the 5th century simply said: "that's it; these will be the approved and only taught doctrines from now on! I suggest you read up a little on early Christian history to see exactly how the doctrines of the church were formed. Note: like sausages and laws, you might not want to watch them being made!

elaine · 08-20-09 4:11 pm

Here's a book on this subject, Bob. (From a Spectrum review today: Ad 381 by Charles Freeman Rich Hannon (technical support for web and Spectrum board member) This book looks at the period between the Council of Nicaea in 325 and the decree in 381 by the emperor Theodosius, which legislated Trinitarian doctrine to be Christian orthodoxy. Popular belief has it that acceptance of the Trinity occurred by growing consensus and was ratified at the Council of Constantinople in 381. This book challenges that view and provides a fascinating look at the various positions — like Arianism — that ‘fought it out’ through the middle of the fourth century. Freeman’s account can be a little unsettling to Christians who are under-informed about early church history. We like to think doctrines we take for granted sprang full-flower from the apostolic era, with instant, broad-based acceptance. This certainly was not the case with the Trinity. The disagreements at times even became physical. And finally Theodosius — finding no consensus and valuing public order over anything else — just shut down debate and declared a ‘winner.’

don · 08-20-09 7:32 pm

We like to think doctrines we take for granted sprang full-flower from the apostolic era, with instant, broad-based acceptance. I find it of interest that this is true for the Adventist church as well. As we look back into the archives, some of the doctrines now considered standard Adventist fare were not in the early days. One of them was the doctrine of the Trinity. For Christian Church, at some point, (I am not sure what the earliest evidence for this is), the church began to depend on the writings of the apostles for its spiritual guidance. Eventually, the writings so used became identified and the list considered closed. Now, with a complete collection of writings, we can establish doctrine from them. This is an ongoing process. Also, we use the closed canon to revise and reform our thinking to line up with earlier record. .

john8verse32 · 08-20-09 8:14 pm

we use the closed canon to revise and reform our thinking to line up with earlier record. that underlying concept could be why religion in general is so sdrawkcab thinking. dying if not already dead. rely on what the ancients said, and only reform ones thinking based on the "closed beliefs". give me the scientific method!!! even if ones theory works, continue to test it to find out the reasons and the limits. If one's theory does not work, find out why, and adjust ones thinking to any new evidence. Don't just rely on what some goat herder misunderstood 4-5000 yrs ago. most SDA's still ignorantly subscribe to antiquated, disproven answers to questions which science has moved beyond. believers live in the past, sacrifice their present, hoping for a future. scientists live in the present, study the past in order to better understand the present and the possible future. They work to make it better, or at least understand it, and hope to also forsee how things will be later based on what we see in the present.

elaine · 08-20-09 9:38 pm

For Christian Church, at some point, (I am not sure what the earliest evidence for this is), the church began to depend on the writings of the apostles for its spiritual guidance. Eventually, the writings so used became identified and the list considered closed. } And many non-canonical writings were used as scripture for several centuries. Each church had its "favorite" writer, and there are evidences in the NT (Jude quotes Enoch), so they had an influence on the choice of what finally became the NT. These non-canonical writings are still very important in understanding the differing beliefs, what was considered heresy by one area was orthodox in another. Many greatly disagreed which lets us know that there was never any general agreement in the early church, which is seen even in the writings of the NT.

bob_2 · 08-20-09 10:24 pm

Elaine, I sure am not going to depend on you and John for where our doctrines came from or what one of your professors spewed forth. It is interesting to me that anything but the Bible is your guide, anything. When you talk, you are not like E.F. Hutton, people don' t automatically listen. Alot of what you say Elaine is illogical, IMO.

billdljr · 08-21-09 12:06 am

Maybe its not the SDA's who are "ignorant". It just may be that those who are trusting in "knowledge so-called" will be the ones who wail and gnash their teeth. We will just have to wait and see won't we.

billdljr · 08-21-09 12:53 am

It never even entered the mind of the New Testament apostles to consider that the Ten Commandments were done away with. They were all commandment keepers and they all observed the Sabbath. The use of Sabbath by author of Hebrews 4 as a metaphor for the "rest" we have in Christ's finished atonement upon the cross certainly cannot be used to show that Christians no longer rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment. Also if one looks at the Didache <a href="http://www.presenttruthmag.com/Judgment/80.html" target="_blank">http://www.presenttruthmag.com/Judgment/80.html</a> lines 8 and 14 one can see that the early church observed the seventh day Sabbath as a day of assembly. This is one of the earliest of Christian documents and it mentions both the "preparation day" and the "Lord's own day". This is an obvious reference to our Friday and the Sabbath. Those who wrest Paul's statement in 2 Corinthians 3:7 to mean that the Ten Commandments are done away with are seriously guilty of eisogesis. It is in his epistle to the Romans where Paul clearly develops the theme of the Law of God being that which brings condemnation and the verdict of death to all the world, Jews and Gentiles alike. God's solution to the sin problem was not to take away the Ten Commandments but rather to offer justification by faith alone to all who believe and repent. Any one who seeks to be justified by the Law, the Jews for instance, are laboring under a "ministration of death" and are devoid of the Spirit which brings life by God's grace alone through faith alone in Christ's blood alone. This was the teaching of all of the great Protestant reformers. They were all Sabbatarians and they all taught the ten commandments in the first, second and third use. It was not until the Anabaptists, the Enthusiasts, and the Campbellites that the teaching of Dispensational antinomianism was spread abroad for the weed that it is in the Christian church. (Message edited by billdljr on August 21, 2009)

don · 08-21-09 2:22 am

These non-canonical writings are still very important in understanding the differing beliefs, what was considered heresy by one area was orthodox in another. The Christian Church (es?) has decided to depend on the set of writings we call the New Testament. The non-canonical writings have historical interest. They serve no relevance in determining doctrine, however. If they agree with the NT, so noted; if they disagree, so noted. We now insist that all, even the very bishops who helped establish the NT Canon, be held to the NT as a measure of their correct teachings. The closed canon does not mean that all other writings are without the Spirit's inspiration. But, the whole of the Christian church have agreed to a common set of writings by which to determine orthodoxy. There have been many spirit-led individuals throughout the centuries. Consider EGW's use of the term "Messenger from the Lord". She applied it to herself, of course, but she also applied it to Jones and Waggoner and even Prescott. There has never been any serious attempt to view any of these "Messengers" as adding to the NT Canon. John has pointed to the scientific method as a source of truth. I believe that Adventists utilize the scientific method to inform their faith as well as any religious group. But, the NT Canon remains closed and, IMO, for good and practical reasons. .

george · 08-21-09 6:29 am

What is so baffling for me is that the Council of Nicea established most (if not all) of the beliefs we accept about the Bible etc. If you read the list of attendees at that council, you would find names from all over the then established Christian world. I would guarantee that SDAs would not find any of those attendees a reliable source for establishing belief; yet, as a group, they come up with certain statements about the Bible and about Jesus and the Holy Spirit and it's all accepted. That same council established Sunday as the day of worship based on Easter being the high point in Christian worship. So, how is it that we accept the decisions made by a group of bishops etc. convened at the request of Constantine (whom we distrust) - AND, we accept some of the decisions, but find that some are unacceptable (Sunday worship). Either the decisions of this council come directly from the thrown of God, all of which are to be accepted without question; or, these decisions are to be seen as the result of political expediency and can be scrutinized like the decisions any other group. The NT canon was the result of decisions reached by a group of mortal men whose intentions are questionable at best. Just because it happened a long time ago does not give these decisions and proclamations legitimacy. How do we decide which of these decisions are to be accepted and which can be questioned?

billdljr · 08-21-09 9:59 am

Reading the writings of Paul, the four gospels, and the other apostles it is not difficult to see that they believed in the vicarious atonement of Christ, the virgin birth, the eternal divinity and Lordship of Christ, Christ as Judge (the "hour of his judgment has come") and Priest for his church, justification by unmerited grace alone through faith alone, sanctification through the Spirit which writes the Law of God upon the heart of the repentant believer, observing the seventh day Sabbath, the second coming of Christ and the eternal judgment of the unrepentant unbelieving world. Those writings which contained Gnostic sentiments and doctrine and which were of questionable authorship were rejected as spurious. Christ who is the head of His church was active in the decisions and providential leading of his people. The bishops who attended these councils were erring sinful men just like us but the Spirit lead in the formation of the New Testament canon so that throughout the history of the church the simple plan of salvation could be ascertained by any searcher for the truth. That's my two cents worth on the matter of the canon and the doctrines of Christianity. There will always be minor differences of opinion but where there are the Holy Spirit will lead the believer to arrive at the truth if he seeks truth in humility and prayer.

Adventists for Tomorrow

Announcement

#51 08-18-09 12:43 am

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#52 08-18-09 12:27 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#53 08-18-09 1:45 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#54 08-18-09 5:30 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#55 08-18-09 5:34 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#56 08-18-09 10:01 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#57 08-18-09 10:02 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#58 08-18-09 10:53 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#59 08-19-09 9:00 am

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#60 08-19-09 9:30 am

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#61 08-19-09 9:52 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#62 08-19-09 9:57 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#63 08-19-09 10:09 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#64 08-19-09 11:45 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#65 08-20-09 4:05 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#66 08-20-09 4:11 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#67 08-20-09 7:32 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#68 08-20-09 8:14 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#69 08-20-09 9:38 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#70 08-20-09 10:24 pm

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#71 08-21-09 12:06 am

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#72 08-21-09 12:53 am

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#73 08-21-09 2:22 am

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#74 08-21-09 6:29 am

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

#75 08-21-09 9:59 am

Re: NCT and the Sabbath Question

Board footer