Atonement on the cross Doctrine is a destructive error?

[pythons]

Prologue:
I so do appreciate your ability to research and recall this information !!!

Let us explore the Omnipresence of GOD !!!

AV 1C 3:16-21 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? 17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which [temple] ye are. 3:18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. 20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. 21 Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;

If GOD is in your "the temple of God"/"body flesh", are you GOD now ???

AV Jn 6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
AV Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
AV 1Jn 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

So you want to split spiritual hairs doctrine over Jesus' flesh body ??? <<< Will you say Yes ???

AV Hb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

State of the Dead issue alert: So why did GOD die in THAT flesh body then ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

You're misunderstanding my point - which is the SDA's said ONLY the Father was God in the ultimate sense and HE HAD FLESH.

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
AV Eph 4:3-13 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 [There is] one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 One God and Father of all, who [is] above all, and through all, and in you all. 7 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. 8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. 9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) 11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

The GOD's Spiritual Unity is NOT about majority orthodoxy about heresies, but oneness within Jesus.

Advanced salvation concepts ahead !!!

Perhaps you could answer my question. Are you saying that the belief that Christ was not eternal God, but rather a created being is not heresy?

"Perhaps you could answer my question.", No, you do not understand from GOD's perspective enough yet. Or understand the error of yours.

Was the Second Person(Son) of the GODhead, GOD before the incarnation(creation) of Jesus' flesh body ???

AV Jn 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt{G4637 skenoo} among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

So did the flesh body of Jesus add anything to the divinity of the GODhead ???

Was Jesus' flesh body was created ???

AV Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth{G2730 katoikeo} all the fulness of the Godhead bodily{G4985 somatikos}.

Did that, Create the GODhead, before the incarnation(creation) of Jesus' flesh body ???

---

AV Ps 103:17-18 But the mercy of the LORD [is] from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children's children; 18 To such as keep his covenant, and to those that remember his commandments to do them.

What punctuated GOD's eternal reign in the universe ???

What necessitated the Second Person(Son) of the GODhead's incarnation then ???

AV Jn 2:19-21 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. 20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? 21 But he spake of the temple of his body.
AV 1C 3:16-21 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? 17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which [temple] ye are. 3:18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. 20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. 21 Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;

Possession of GOD's in a VERY important concept in Truth !!! So what is GOD's, is GOD, in your understanding ???

AV Jn 6:55-56 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
AV 1C 11:28-29 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of [that] bread, and drink of [that] cup. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

What does Jesus' "my flesh" and "my blood" do for us ???

---

There is a lot here. Ask questions before anyone assumes anything, Okay ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[pythons]

SDAChristian,

To Common Tater's reasonable point.

“Some have difficulty in reconciling Christ's statement in John 14 : 28, " My Father is greater than I," with the idea that He is God, and is entitled to worship. Some, indeed, dwell upon that text alone as sufficient to overthrow the idea of Christ's divinity ; but if that were allowed, it would only prove a contradiction in the Bible, and even in

Christ's own speech; for it is most positively declared, as we have seen, that He is Divine. There are two facts which are amply sufficient to account for Christ's statement recorded in John 14: 28. One is that Christ is the Son of God. While both are of the same nature, the Father is first in point of time. He is also greater in that He had no beginning, while Christ's personality had a beginning”. Present Truth December 18, 1890

It's above said that prior to the Incarnation that Christ's "PERSONALITY" [ i.e. body, organs, members, bones ,etc.] had a beginning & that BOTH Father God and Christ were of the same nature. Compare the above statement made by Ellen White's husband in 1890 to Ellen's statement in

"God is self-existent, and the source and author of all things,-of angels, of men, of all the worlds,-of everything. Thus Paul says, "For. of him, and through him, and to him, are all things; to whom be glory forever. Amen." Rom. 11: 36. He is the source of all life and immortality. Thus, speaking of the Father, Paul says, " Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto." 1 Tim. 6: 16. Notice that this glorious God is the only one who, in himself, possesses immortality. That is, he is the fountain-head, the source' of all life and immortality, Even Jesus Christ, the Son of God, derives his existence and his life from the Father." Ellen White, Sabbath Herald, August 29, 1878

If Michael the archangel's "BODY" had a beginning and into this "BODY" was poured 'divinity' or 'deity' this was a component whole, a creation or creature. Ellen White was extremely clear as to WHY Christ had power and what would happen to it IF Christ sinned or otherwise failed.

Ellen White MS 99,1903 page 3,4
He had infinite power ONLY because He was perfectly obedient to His Father's will

Ellen White, Seventh Day Adventist Bible commentary.
Though Christ humbled Himself to become man, the Godhead was still His own. His Deity could not be lost while He stood faithful and true to His loyalty.

If Ellen's hypothetical would have been realized you can reverse the order of creature christ - had he not remained faithful to God his deity WOULD HAVE BEEN LOST - the Personality or body becomes a husk or corpse once again proving the creature Christ view of Ellen White and the other anti-Trinitarian SDA's.

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
AV Mt 18:16 But if he will not hear [thee, then] take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

I am a Christ's follower, expecting others to do the same.

You're misunderstanding my point - which is the SDA's said ONLY the Father was God in the ultimate sense and HE HAD FLESH.

"... the SDA's said ...", In my understanding, that is a pretty broad statement. So please narrow it down to a person's quote ???

Thank You !!!

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[SDAchristian]

SDAChristian,
To Common Tater's reasonable point.
...

As I study and pray about the rest of this post, this thought came to mind:

Precedence of perspective during GOD's free will offering to mankind, during GOD's permissive will probation:

AV Mt 19:16-19 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19 Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Jesus choose the Decalogue over proving Jesus' divinity in perspective about "eternal life".

That was Jesus' choice to be made about "eternal life" of human beings.

AV 1Jn 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

I wonder if we believe like Jesus did in the flesh/body ???

Which is more important understanding salvation or understanding divinity who offers salvation ???

AV Ja 2:19-20 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

Understanding divinity earns anyone salvation ???

---

The last true ultimate blasphemy is to negate GOD's free will offering to mankind, during GOD's permissive will probation during this season of sin. That is what Pharaoh did in the typical battle of good and evil, and lost. This is what Jesus offers in the anti-type of the battle between good and evil and WINS !!!

AV Ex 5:5 And Pharaoh said, Behold, the people of the land now [are] many, and ye make them rest from their burdens.

It was over the sabbath !!! It ended with the plagues wiping out Pharaoh's will(and theocracy) over GOD's people. DUH !!!

Ignorance of GOD's end prophecies between evil and good, will result in the lost of many souls of the beast.

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[pythons]

Prologue:
AV Mt 18:16 But if he will not hear [thee, then] take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

I am a Christ's follower, expecting others to do the same.

"... the SDA's said ...", In my understanding, that is a pretty broad statement. So please narrow it down to a person's quote ???

Thank You !!!

Yours in Christ, Michael

I've quoted multiple articles / statements from the Sabbath Herald SDA Paper, Ellen White made some of those same quotes so I'm not sure what else you'd need to affirm the quotes are legit?

 

[pythons]

As I study and pray about the rest of this post, this thought came to mind:

Precedence of perspective during GOD's free will offering to mankind, during GOD's permissive will probation:

AV Mt 19:16-19 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19 Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Jesus choose the Decalogue over proving Jesus' divinity in perspective about "eternal life".

That was Jesus' choice to be made about "eternal life" of human beings.

AV 1Jn 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

I wonder if we believe like Jesus did in the flesh/body ???

Which is more important understanding salvation or understanding divinity who offers salvation ???

AV Ja 2:19-20 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

Understanding divinity earns anyone salvation ???

---

The last true ultimate blasphemy is to negate GOD's free will offering to mankind, during GOD's permissive will probation during this season of sin. That is what Pharaoh did in the typical battle of good and evil, and lost. This is what Jesus offers in the anti-type of the battle between good and evil and WINS !!!

AV Ex 5:5 And Pharaoh said, Behold, the people of the land now [are] many, and ye make them rest from their burdens.

It was over the sabbath !!! It ended with the plagues wiping out Pharaoh's will(and theocracy) over GOD's people. DUH !!!

Ignorance of GOD's end prophecies between evil and good, will result in the lost of many souls of the beast.

Yours in Christ, Michael

I'm not following you? I mean no disrespect when I say your response isn't relative to the question.

 

[SDAchristian]

As I study and pray about the rest of this post, this thought came to mind:
Precedence of perspective during GOD's free will offering to mankind, during GOD's permissive will probation:

AV Mt 19:16-19 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19 Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Jesus choose the Decalogue over proving Jesus' divinity in perspective about "eternal life".
That was Jesus' choice to be made about "eternal life" of human beings.
AV 1Jn 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.
I wonder if we believe like Jesus did in the flesh/body ???
Which is more important understanding salvation or understanding divinity who offers salvation ???
AV Ja 2:19-20 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
Understanding divinity earns anyone salvation ???

---

The last true ultimate blasphemy is to negate GOD's free will offering to mankind, during GOD's permissive will probation during this season of sin. That is what Pharaoh did in the typical battle of good and evil, and lost. This is what Jesus offers in the anti-type of the battle between good and evil and WINS !!!
AV Ex 5:5 And Pharaoh said, Behold, the people of the land now [are] many, and ye make them rest from their burdens.
It was over the sabbath !!! It ended with the plagues wiping out Pharaoh's will(and theocracy) over GOD's people. DUH !!!
Ignorance of GOD's end prophecies between evil and good, will result in the lost of many souls of the beast.

I'm not following you? I mean no disrespect when I say your response isn't relative to the question.

The most important point is, during our discussion on divinity, is Jesus' choice here:

AV Mt 19:16-19 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19 Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Jesus' first objection is to the usage of "Good Master" title. To which Jesus' replied "Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God". Jesus was addressing the One principle in divinity, not the membership of the GODhead, as an order of precedence principle.

Jesus second was an answer to "... what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?". To which Jesus replied, "but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 18 ... Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19 Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.".

Defending divinity does NOT give "eternal life", but following the Decalogue does not create sin in a person's life, to take away eternal life from that person.

AV Ro 5:11 And not only [so], but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement{G2643 katallage}.

Please note Paul's timing of "the atonement{G2643 katallage}".

AV 2C 5:18-19 And all things [are] of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation{G2643 katallage}; 19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

We will have eternity with GOD to learn about divinity. We have only our lifetime to take advantage of GOD's eternal salvation reconciliation offer.

"when I say your response isn't relative to the question.", Okay, I am working on a big picture bases here. "is the doctrine of the atonement{per Paul's usage of G2643 katallage} on the cross", So I ask, was "the ministry of reconciliation{G2643 katallage}" finished at the cross ???

Has anyone noticed that Jesus did not use the word "atonement" in Jesus' ministry ???

---

Anyone's understand of "reconciliation{G2643 katallage}"/"the atonement{G2643 katallage}" is useless, unless what the two parties understand of the covenant contract details of what needs reconciling.

AV Mt 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
AV 1C 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

So do you understand the reconciling details, that Jesus' blood paid for on the cross ???

Keep asking questions, to properly understand this perspective.

AV Mt 12:31-32 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy [against] the [Holy] Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. 32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the [world] to come.

I did not say believe, because that happens between the Holy Spirit and the person.

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[Common Tater]

Prologue:
AV Eph 4:3-13 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 [There is] one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 One God and Father of all, who [is] above all, and through all, and in you all. 7 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. 8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. 9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) 11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

The GOD's Spiritual Unity is NOT about majority orthodoxy about heresies, but oneness within Jesus.

Advanced salvation concepts ahead !!!

"Perhaps you could answer my question.", No, you do not understand from GOD's perspective enough yet. Or understand the error of yours.

Was the Second Person(Son) of the GODhead, GOD before the incarnation(creation) of Jesus' flesh body ???

AV Jn 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt{G4637 skenoo} among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

So did the flesh body of Jesus add anything to the divinity of the GODhead ???

Was Jesus' flesh body was created ???

AV Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth{G2730 katoikeo} all the fulness of the Godhead bodily{G4985 somatikos}.

Did that, Create the GODhead, before the incarnation(creation) of Jesus' flesh body ???

---

AV Ps 103:17-18 But the mercy of the LORD [is] from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children's children; 18 To such as keep his covenant, and to those that remember his commandments to do them.

What punctuated GOD's eternal reign in the universe ???

What necessitated the Second Person(Son) of the GODhead's incarnation then ???

AV Jn 2:19-21 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. 20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? 21 But he spake of the temple of his body.
AV 1C 3:16-21 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? 17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which [temple] ye are. 3:18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. 20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. 21 Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;

Possession of GOD's in a VERY important concept in Truth !!! So what is GOD's, is GOD, in your understanding ???

AV Jn 6:55-56 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
AV 1C 11:28-29 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of [that] bread, and drink of [that] cup. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

What does Jesus' "my flesh" and "my blood" do for us ???

---

There is a lot here. Ask questions before anyone assumes anything, Okay ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

This is convoluted malarkay. I asked a clear and specific question. That question is as follows: Are you saying that the belief that Christ was not eternal God, but rather a created being is not heresy? You answer it by trying to make the case that the Son is a "created being" in the sense that his body was "created" at the incarnation. This is spiritual and intellectual dishonesty. You know full well what is being asked. Is the position that Arius put forth, that "there was a time when the Son was not", heresy? And you know full well that this is what the early leadership in your church believed.

I've offered Adventist theologian, Gerhard Pfandl's paper on the Trinity in Adventism and I do so again. Read for yourself what the early leadership said and then I ask you again to answer the question that I have put to you several times.

https://adventistbiblicalresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/trinitydoc-among-sda_0.pdf

 

[Common Tater]

AV Ex 5:5 And Pharaoh said, Behold, the people of the land now [are] many, and ye make them rest from their burdens.

It was over the sabbath !!! It ended with the plagues wiping out Pharaoh's will(and theocracy) over GOD's people. DUH !!!

Ignorance of GOD's end prophecies between evil and good, will result in the lost of many souls of the beast.

Yours in Christ, Michael

This is pure eisegesis on your part. There is no mention of the Sabbath in this chapter.

And afterward Moses and Aaron came and said to Pharaoh, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, ‘Let My people go that they may celebrate a feast to Me in the wilderness.’” But Pharaoh said, “Who is the LORD that I should obey His voice to let Israel go? I do not know the LORD, and besides, I will not let Israel go.” Then they said, “The God of the Hebrews has met with us. Please, let us go a three days’ journey into the wilderness that we may sacrifice to the LORD our God, otherwise He will fall upon us with pestilence or with the sword.” But the king of Egypt said to them, “Moses and Aaron, why do you draw the people away from their work? Get back to your labors!” Again Pharaoh said, “Look, the people of the land are now many, and you would have them cease from their labors!”

All that is mentioned here is a request to go into the wilderness for three days to offer a sacrifice to God and celebrate a feast. You have a penchant for twisting Scripture in an attempt to make it say what you want it to say.

 

[pythons]

If I could I would like to present what I and Common Tater are saying in another way.

The early SDA's (during the time of Ellen White's life) taught against the Trinity Doctrine making repeated attacks against it claiming that Christ was NOT God Almighty. Also militantly claimed was that the Father, Michael & Lucifer the archangels HAD FLESH, BONE, member and part bodies prior to the Incarnation of Michael the archangel.

These teachings were "FUNDAMENTAL" and called "PILLARS" of the Seventh-day Adventist Faith. If you wanted to be a Seventh-day Adventist you had to subscribe to those teachings.

The Biblical equivalent to the above would be finding an Old Testament Prophet that led the Children of Israel into worshipping false God's for several generations and the Prophet that did that wasn't labeled as a false one. I'm not seeing anything in the Bible where this happened.

 

[JonHawk]

pythons:​

“Another error, even more generally endorsed than any of the foregoing, is the doctrine of the atonement on the cross. This also furnishes another support for Unitarianism. The Scriptures plainly teach that Christ died for all men. Now if his death on the cross was the atonement, then the sins of all men are atoned for, and all will be saved. The conclusion is unavoidable, and we deny the doctrine of the atonement on the cross, not because it leads to this belief, but because it is scripturally untrue, and then as an incentive for proclaiming its falsity we have the fact that it is a strong pillar for a destructive error.” Sabbath Herald, August 29, 1865 No. 13

The above type of Scripture Scholar is also credited with the Doctrines of the Sabbath, soul sleep, creature christ & the sanctuary. I'm not sure even the Mormons have made such an outlandish affirmation.

Jon:
She was in error because she did not know the Scriptures nor the power of God.

Having made peace through the blood of His cross. Colossians 1:19-23

By a new and living way; Hebrews 10:19-22

For through Him we have access by one Spirit to the Father. Eph 2:18-20

A lot of different people brought heretical doctrines into the SDA Church...
...Ellen subsequently had visions & made statements confirming those doctrines.
....This is the point I and others have been making.

The statement is affirmed by Ellen's confirmation of the 1844 Sanctuary teaching.

Jon:
In her Great Controversy book she affirmed that the 1844 movement led by Miller was directed by God and free from human error, but don't be deceived, all those who deny the atonement on the cross, will be greatly disappointed.

"At length William Miller raised his voice against the light from heaven. He leaned to human wisdom instead of divine;

William Miller erred. . .in suffering his influence to go against the truth." {Early Writings, Ellen G White}​

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The world through its wisdom did not come to know God, since He was pleased through the foolishness of the message
preached to save those who believe.

 

[Wrenage]

This is convoluted malarkay. I asked a clear and specific question. That question is as follows: Are you saying that the belief that Christ was not eternal God, but rather a created being is not heresy? You answer it by trying to make the case that the Son is a "created being" in the sense that his body was "created" at the incarnation. This is spiritual and intellectual dishonesty. You know full well what is being asked. Is the position that Arius put forth, that "there was a time when the Son was not", heresy? And you know full well that this is what the early leadership in your church believed.

I've offered Adventist theologian, Gerhard Pfandl's paper on the Trinity in Adventism and I do so again. Read for yourself what the early leadership said and then I ask you again to answer the question that I have put to you several times.

https://adventistbiblicalresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/trinitydoc-among-sda_0.pdf

I find Seventh Day Adventist stuff very hard to read because it always seems to go in circles around issues rather than address them directly.

Ellen White is a potent drug. SDAs really made a horrible mistake giving her "prophet" status. Then they have to make the Bible fit her words even though she is the "lesser light."

Then if you don't buy the circle talk, they seem to fall back on telling themselves, "Well, that person is under the beast for going to church on Sunday, so obviously they can't see truth when it is right in front of their face."

I am a Lutheran, so one could say I am in a similar boat because Lutherans have a "leader" so to speak, but it is not even close to the same thing as being under the bondage of Ellen White. If someone says to me, "Explain this stupid thing Luther said," I don't have to explain it. I can simply say, "Luther said a stupid thing and was clearly wrong."

Because Luther doesn't have prophet status. He's merely a theologian — still way, way, way more on the ball than Ellen White doctrinally — but merely a theologian nevertheless.

 

[JonHawk]

pythons:​

“Another error, even more generally endorsed than any of the foregoing, is the doctrine of the atonement on the cross. ...The conclusion is unavoidable, and we deny the doctrine of the atonement on the cross, not because it leads to this belief, but because it is scripturally untrue, and then as an incentive for proclaiming its falsity we have the fact that it is a strong pillar for a destructive error.” Sabbath Herald, August 29, 1865 No. 13

I find Seventh Day Adventist stuff very hard to read because it always seems to go in circles around issues rather than address them directly.

Ellen White is a potent drug. SDAs really made a horrible mistake giving her "prophet" status. ...

I am a Lutheran, so one could say I am in a similar boat because Lutherans have a "leader" so to speak, but it is not even close to the same thing as being under the bondage of Ellen White. If someone says to me, "Explain this stupid thing Luther said," I don't have to explain it. I can simply say, "Luther said a stupid thing and was clearly wrong."

Because Luther doesn't have prophet status. He's merely a theologian — still way, way, way more on the ball than Ellen White doctrinally — but merely a theologian nevertheless.

The only thing consistent in EGW's teaching is inconsistency:

"Man, with his human, finite judgment, cannot safely question the wisdom of God. ... Before the theme of redemption, let man lay his wisdom in the dust, and accept the plans of Him whose wisdom is infinite.​

​

Through the atonement of the Son of God alone could power be given to man to establish him in righteousness, and make him a fit subject for heaven." EGW, Originally published in The Signs of the Times, December 30, 1889.​

​

Just a heads up, if the former Baptist preacher was a prophet, he would not have been speculating on Christ's return.
But test the spirits to see whether they are from God. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you are disqualified.

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
AV Mt 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Perhaps you could answer my question. Are you saying that the belief that Christ was not eternal God, but rather a created being is not heresy?

The question of authority, is in question, for this question.

GOD knows all things in Omniscience. So to speculate, means to believe a lie in the absence of GOD's knowledge of Truth. Which GOD will judge in absolute surety.

AV Mt 3:16-17 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

When did Jesus become GOD's Son with evidence to verify GOD's statement, is either telling the Truth or telling a lie ???

The judgment of authority in your question, assumes you have this answer.

---

AV Mt 21:25-27 The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him? 26 But if we shall say, Of men; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet. 27 And they answered Jesus, and said, We cannot tell. And he said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.

At least they answered Jesus with "We cannot tell." for a question in hypocrisy.

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[Icyspark]

“Another error, even more generally endorsed than any of the foregoing, is the doctrine of the atonement on the cross. This also furnishes another support for Unitarianism. The Scriptures plainly teach that Christ died for all men. Now if his death on the cross was the atonement, then the sins of all men are atoned for, and all will be saved. The conclusion is unavoidable, and we deny the doctrine of the atonement on the cross, not because it leads to this belief, but because it is scripturally untrue, and then as an incentive for proclaiming its falsity we have the fact that it is a strong pillar for a destructive error.” Sabbath Herald, August 29, 1865 No. 13

The above type of Scripture Scholar is also credited with the Doctrines of the Sabbath, soul sleep, creature christ & the sanctuary. I'm not sure even the Mormons have made such an outlandish affirmation.

Hi pythons,

I find this disingenuous coming from someone who insists that Seventh-day Adventists must not appeal to any source other than official, Catholic imprimatured writings. Not only is this not an official doctrine of our church, what you have supplied doesn't even have an author name attached to it. There is also no supplied context and there is no way to verify that this is even an actual quote from an SDA periodical. It very well may be that it is an actual quote, but there are certainly enough other factors which mitigate any of the supposed offensiveness of the quote.

 

[pythons]

Hi pythons,

I find this disingenuous coming from someone who insists that Seventh-day Adventists must not appeal to any source other than official, Catholic imprimatured writings. Not only is this not an official doctrine of our church, what you have supplied doesn't even have an author name attached to it. There is also no supplied context and there is no way to verify that this is even an actual quote from an SDA periodical. It very well may be that it is an actual quote, but there are certainly enough other factors which mitigate any of the supposed offensiveness of the quote.

It evidently wasn't disingenuous enough to keep Herbert Douglas from saying;


"The Cross was only a means to an end, it was NOT THE END OF ANYTHING".

The idiom "means to an end" is defined as a thing that is not valued or important in of itself but is useful in achieving an aim.

Source: @ the 54 minute mark of the following video

Herbert Douglas Discusses the book 'Questions on Doctrine' - YouTube

My question to you is if you share Herbert's belief that someone can't really understand the Atonement WITHOUT having knowledge of "The Great Controversy Theme" (a book written by Ellen White)?

If this wasn't bread & butter SDA theology I'm thinking the likes of Herb Douglas wouldn't have said it was necessary to believe it.

But, I'd gladly take your thoughts on the matter.

Oh, here ya go. Its page 5 "Popular Error's & their Fruits" / Sabbath Herald:

https://documents.adventistarchives.org/Periodicals/RH/RH18650829-V26-13.pdf

 

[Buzzard]

The judgment of authority in your question, assumes you have this answer.

---

AV Mt 21:25-27 The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him? 26 But if we shall say, Of men; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet. 27 And they answered Jesus, and said, We cannot tell. And he said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.

At least they answered Jesus with "We cannot tell." for a question in hypocrisy.

Yours in Christ, Michael

AV Mt 21:25-27 The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him? 26 But if we shall say, Of men; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet. 27 And they answered Jesus, and said, We cannot tell. And he said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.

Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.

Oh; but Michael he did answer;
have you never read anything but SDA Hype and tripe ?????

Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.
Matt.21:28
But what think ye?
A certain man had two sons;
and he came to the first, and said,
Son, go work to day in my vineyard.

29He answered and said, I will not:
but afterward he repented, and went.

30And he came to the second, and said likewise.
And he answered and said, I go, sir: and went not.

31Whether of them twain did the will of his father?
They say unto him, The first.
Jesus saith unto them,
Verily I say unto you,
That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.

32For John came unto you in the way of righteousness,
and ye believed him not:
but the publicans and the harlots believed him:
and ye, when ye had seen it,
repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.

33Hear another parable:
There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard,
and hedged it round about,
and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower,
and let it out to husbandmen,
and went into a far country: .....
..........

 

[Common Tater]

Prologue:
AV Mt 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

The question of authority, is in question, for this question.

GOD knows all things in Omniscience. So to speculate, means to believe a lie in the absence of GOD's knowledge of Truth. Which GOD will judge in absolute surety.

AV Mt 3:16-17 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

When did Jesus become GOD's Son with evidence to verify GOD's statement, is either telling the Truth or telling a lie ???

The judgment of authority in your question, assumes you have this answer.

---

AV Mt 21:25-27 The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him? 26 But if we shall say, Of men; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet. 27 And they answered Jesus, and said, We cannot tell. And he said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.

At least they answered Jesus with "We cannot tell." for a question in hypocrisy.

Yours in Christ, Michae

I begin to suspect that you are one of those Adventists that do not believe that the Son was eternal God, but rather was a created being.

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
AV Lv 23:3 Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day [is] the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work [therein]: it [is] the sabbath of the LORD in all your dwellings.
AV Lv 23:32 It [shall be] unto you a sabbath of rest, and ye shall afflict your souls: in the ninth [day] of the month at even, from even unto even, shall ye celebrate your sabbath.

This is pure eisegesis on your part. There is no mention of the Sabbath in this chapter.

And afterward Moses and Aaron came and said to Pharaoh, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, ‘Let My people go that they may celebrate a feast to Me in the wilderness.’” But Pharaoh said, “Who is the LORD that I should obey His voice to let Israel go? I do not know the LORD, and besides, I will not let Israel go.” Then they said, “The God of the Hebrews has met with us. Please, let us go a three days’ journey into the wilderness that we may sacrifice to the LORD our God, otherwise He will fall upon us with pestilence or with the sword.” But the king of Egypt said to them, “Moses and Aaron, why do you draw the people away from their work? Get back to your labors!” Again Pharaoh said, “Look, the people of the land are now many, and you would have them cease from their labors!”

All that is mentioned here is a request to go into the wilderness for three days to offer a sacrifice to God and celebrate a feast. You have a penchant for twisting Scripture in an attempt to make it say what you want it to say.

"... you would have them cease from their labors!", Pharaoh understood the context, so why do you not ???

Yours in Christ, Michael