Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
pacunurse30

Do SDA's need an overhaul of endtime prophecy?

Recommended Posts

Gregory Matthews

Life we accept a great deal difference in thought in this forum .  We allow people to critique the SDA Church.  Your web  link went beyond what is appropriate.

By the way I am in church but decided that I needed to respond now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
5 hours ago, LifeHiscost said:

Conference rep Ganoune Diop meets with the man of sin, the pope, at the Vatican in October 2016,
and signs an agreement with the pope and other churches to not criticize each other's religion.
Are you supporting this handshake, hug and union?  Is God holding you responsible for funding Diop & the pope?

I think some Presbyterians got ahold of some Adventist literature by mistake!

https://presbyterianreformed.org/2018/09/on-the-reaction-of-protestants-to-romes-scandals/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gregory Matthews

Folks, once a post has been hidden from view, do not quote from it.   Such posts will also be hidden from view.

The original post was hidden, in part, due to the amount of personal attacks on SDA leadership.  That post was well beyond what we expect to be posted here, and in more than one area.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
1 hour ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Folks, once a post has been hidden from view, do not quote from it.   Such posts will also be hidden from view.

I am assuming that my post was referred to since it seems to be missing. But if a post  was hidden, how was I able to see and quote from it? And other than the quote, what exactly was not acceptable about my post, if indeed it was mine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gregory Matthews

Yes, two hours after I removed a post from view you (Photodude) posted a quote form it.

As to the manner in which you did such, I am not going to speculate.

When a post is removed from view, it may be removed in more than one way.  Most of the time it can still be viewed by a few people.  I am not aware that you are one of those.  Those who can still view it are made aware that it has been removed from general view.  So, I do not have an answer to your question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
7 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Yes, two hours after I removed a post from view you (Photodude) posted a quote form it.

As to the manner in which you did such, I am not going to speculate.

When a post is removed from view, it may be removed in more than one way. 

I have no special privileges here to view any hidden posts. And as I can still see the post whether I am logged in or not and on multiple devices, I suspect the post is not really hidden. Only mine. It would be nice to have the info I posted as it was very relevant to many discussions here at Adventistan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gregory Matthews

Previously I hid a post that Photodude had made and stated that I had done so on the basis that Photodude had quoted from another post that I had hidden.  Photodude has  stated that he did not quote from that hidden post.  I have also been challenged by others who have also stated that he did not quote from the hidden post.

I have reviewed the post in question.  I was correct.  A statement that Photodude made is found in a link in a statement that I hid.  However, Photodude  tells us that he got the statement from another source and did not get it from the post that I hid.

I accept the statement that Photodude has made.  As my stated reason was what I believed to be his source, and that was not his source, I have now opened up Photodude's post for view by all.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gregory Matthews

In the ongoing discussion that I have had related to this matter, I have located the other post by LHC that Photodude directly quoted.

When I first read that post, I considered hiding it and I decided not to hide it.  That decision of mine will stand.  In view of that, the quote of Photodude will continue to remain in view.

My decision to hide the 2nd post that LHC made was made for more than one reason.  Included in my decision to hide that post were other statements made in the link in that post.  IOW, the statement that Photodude quoted was neither the only reason , nor the primary reason that I made to close the 2nd post.

When I hide Photodude's post, I had forgotten about LHCs first post.  I thought that it came from what I now know was LHCs 2nd post which I had hidden.  Generallly, if a post is removed/hidden references that quote from that post are also removed/hidden.

I am satisfied that Photodude did not, as he states, quote from a post that I had hidden.  So, it is in view, as is the post from which he quoted.

NOTE:  Generally it is expected that people  who have a question with what a Moderator have a private discussion.  I have felt that in this case, an exception is justified.  So, I have made it public regardless of the fact that people have been in private contact with me. Frankly, those private comments have been helpful to me.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
20 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

NOTE:  Generally it is expected that people  who have a question with what a Moderator have a private discussion.  I have felt that in this case, an exception is justified.  So, I have made it public regardless of the fact that people have been in private contact with me. Frankly, those private comments have been helpful to me.

Will keep that in mind regarding private discussion. I just noted that what I quoted was still public and was getting confused, but I guess what I quoted from a quote from a hidden post!

Noting that you previously had said that critique of the church is acceptable here on Adventistan, my post was really more about criticism of the church which comes from so many directions. Some of the criticism of the SDA church seems to pass along the idea that the SDA church and the early church leaders are the ones who dreamed up all the interpretations of Revelation to finger the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) as the beast or harlot of revelation. However, not so. It has been probably since the early days of the reformation that some of Revelation was clear to the early reformers. Even the number 666 has long been identified with the papacy and while it (Vicarius Filii Dei)  is often said to be on the papal miter. However, while it is no longer on the miter, it is said to have been there once and removed in 1798 before there was an SDA. I have read many non-SDA sources which associate the RCC with the beast and harlot of Revelation, both modern and pre-SDA.  However, I do believe that the best understanding of Revelation comes from SDA sources, it does not mean that no one else ever had an understanding of the book of Revelation.

The earliest extant record of a Protestant writer on this
subject and addressing the phrase Vicarius Filii Dei is
Andreas Helwig in 1612. In his work Antichristus
Romanus he took 15 titles in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin and
computed their numerical equivalents in those languages,
arriving at the number 666 mentioned in the Book of
Revelation. Out of all these titles, he preferred to
single out Vicarius Filii Dei, used in the Donation of
Constantine, for the reason that it met "all the
conditions [that] [Cardinal] Bellarmine had thus far
demanded." Besides being in Latin, the title was "not
offensive or vile", but rather was "honorable to this
very one."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicarius_Filii_Dei

Keep in mind that most non-Catholic Christians are known as Protestants, or "protesters." But then some in the Christian world are now beginning to believe that the "protest is over" as they are being woo'ed back into the RCC fold.

So, it seems to me that much of the criticism of the church is not thought out well, researched well, and is even just another excuse to attack the church.

All that said, I also tend to believe the original post I quoted to also have been an unnecessary criticism of the RCC. In the past I am familiar with situations where Catholics people who were developing an appreciation of the SDA message have been so upset with the harsh criticism of the RCC that they left the SDA church never to return. I believe their loss will be held against the person displaying such antipathy towards the RCC. One such person in a c hurch can undo the work of others who have long labored with someone to bring them to the Gospel message. It is very bad form to criticize the RCC to strangers and students of the gospel in such a disparaging way. Individual members of the RCC are not the beast!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
47 minutes ago, B/W Photodude said:

One such person in a c hurch can undo the work of others who have long labored with someone to bring them to the Gospel message. It is very bad form to criticize the RCC to strangers and students of the gospel in such a disparaging way. Individual members of the RCC are not the beast!

I couldnt agree with you more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stinsonmarri
On 6/4/2007 at 9:11 PM, pacunurse30 said:

He's not sure if the antichrist is an actual person, or system, but he does not accept the traditional SDA view that it is the Catholic church/papacy. He does believe the pope will be instrumental in end time events, however, because of the influence he has over the entire world.

Well I have read a lot of people comments about the end time prophecy needs an overhaul. I even hear the comment I constantly stated from EGW, that less should be said about the papacy. Yes as I have said in other comments that the papacy and the beast were separate. The papacy is the whore and the beast "that is," is of the 7th. As for the judgment it is clear, it started in 1844 and in order to clean the books you first have to start with the Adams, which will lead to Enoch, Moses and the in the NT saints, the elders and the multitude that went to Heaven when THE MESSIAH went. When HE died for all of them who had to be save, HE had to take the Book of Life and seal all them first! They along with the dead up to the Day of Atonement Oct 22, 1844 all still had to judged. Now here is the problem the SDA do not understand why the Holy Convocation days are important and were not nail to the cross! I wrote an article if anyone is interested go to my email and request it and I send it to you. It also deals with YAHWEH original calendar which is a lunar solar calendar. I do not follow any flat earth nonsense only Gen 1:14 and the flood I presented here the proof of 7 literal days which makes up a month of 29-30 days and not 31-Catholic folks!

Now I will deal with two things the 666 and 144,000 (that includes the behead also)! You know EGW always said take the Bible she also saw that words were change in the Bible. Uriah Smith and the early pioneers all came from Protestant churches and some of their views they brought into the SDA Church. If the Church had listen to Jones and Waggoner they would have seen their mistakes. What happen the Church changed not the Truth! Now why did the Bible say in Rev 13:18 "Here is wisdom," and you need understand? Bible said line upon line right but we just don't listen. Some of you were close but listen to what is said and understand. Correct the Adams were originally 7 and when they both fail they became a 6 which imperfect. So in order to understand Rev 13:18 about 666 you need some more clue. Rev 17:8: "the beast that was, and is not, and yet is." That was-6; is not-6 and yet is-6. Folks YAHWEH has been saying all along the controversy is between true worship and false worship. Now Cain started false worship but the antediluvian were destroyed by the flood. YAHWEH always let you know who they are that dare like Satan go against YAHWEH and most of the world follows these powerful false men. The Bible made it so plain that these three imperfect geniuses would each take the scene during certain periods of time with the aide of Satan and would try to take over this world and  attempt to stop YAHWEH TRUE WORSHIP. All three almost succeeded. Nimrod is the one that was and he took false religion to a level that "YAHWEH SAID, Let US go down!" Gen 11:6-8 The biggest lie told that YAHWEH knock down the tower not so! They let off building the city. We all being dupe by this one!

When man was scattered they all took a part of Nimrod religion with them. It was the papacy or the little horn that united Nimrod's false religion back together. That why YAHWEH SAID, the papacy will attempt or think to change HIS Time (Statutes) and his Laws, not going to happen but here goes the one who is not right now. EGW was right there is less said about the papacy right now. Next which has not happen yet the beast. Let stop for a minute folks you don't read the Bible and I am serious. If you did, YAHWEH gives three woes between the second and third woe the beast comes from the bottom less pit. I want people to please think about where this is, here are some verses that give you the clue. Luke 8:30, 31; Jude 1:6; Rev 9:1, 2, 11; 11:7, 8; 20:1, 3 Now how many have read EGW Spirit of Prophecy BK Vol 1 Chapter 1 The fall of Satan. 

The SON of God and true, loyal angels prevailed; and Satan and his sympathizers were expelled from Heaven. All the Heavenly host acknowledged and adored the God of justice. Not a taint of rebellion was left in Heaven. . .

Angels in Heaven mourned the fate of those who had been their companions in happiness and bliss. Their loss was felt in Heaven. The Father consulted Jesus in regard to at once carrying out their purpose to make man to inhabit the earth. He would place man upon probation to test his loyalty, before he could be rendered eternally secure.

Chapter 3—The Temptation and Fall PDF SP Vol. 1 p. 18, 22-26

If you read the above, she give you the clues as well. Now the beast is the one  that is call the yet is and he did come from the Catholic Church. However he rejected her and all religions. That's why I am sick of this Jesuit mess. It is not Biblical but again SDA starts myths too! Read people he want you to worship him. Let see if there is example, yep Nebuchadnezzar built an image had all had to worship it. Not get this, this image was not any of their deities they worship. This image was totally different and it was an exact retaliation against THE MOST HIGH TRUE WORSHIP!  

Briefly why don't you believe the Bible when it said that the woman's seed would have a remnant? Then the Bible says literally 144,000 not once but in two chapters. The SDA Church always skips Rev 14:1-5 and jump to 6 why? Oh ye of little faith, another example prove that the 144,000 are a literal number. Read Judges Chapter 7 and how Gideon started with 32,000 but YAHWEH brought it down to 300. Daniel 12:2 says that some will wake up during the Time of Trouble for everlasting life and the wise teachers will bring in souls. So we do not know who will rise up and aide the 144,000 living saints. I believe Noah, Daniel, Joshua and so many more that we least expect will arise for the cause. We need to stop and either accept the Bible, understand YAHWEH's WISDOM and UNDERSTANDING that THE HOLY SPIRIT gives and believe it! I do but that's me all must choose! 

The verse that deals with beheaded, I would like to see if others would do research and find the original word and its meaning first before I say anything.

Blessings!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×