Discussion:
The Bible is in error, so Ellen's not so bad
(too old to reply)
Stephen Korsman
2006-07-08 15:48:52 UTC
Permalink
From my blog at
http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/post/index/226/Bacchiocchi--Some-things-Paul-wrote-are-unacceptable
(http://tinyurl.com/pdtd9)

Recently I've seen a fair bit written on how many Adventists tend to lower
the Bible in order to raise Ellen White to the same level. Ellen White's
writings are considered divinely inspired by some, a claim she herself made
for them. Because of the errors they contain, many Adventists who still
want to see her as inspired have taken to trying to demonstrate that similar
errors exist in the Bible. The intent is to show that not even God's
inspired prophets and writers in the Bible get things right all the time, so
Ellen White doesn't need to be any different.

I've got two articles on this phenomenon on my website -
Adventist pastor - Bible contains truth, but also "opinion" -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor01.html
Adventist pastor - uninspired statements by Paul in the Bible -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor02.html

The latest Proclamation! magazine of May/June 2006 has an excellent article
on this by Dr Verle Streifling. It can be found here:
http://formeradvent.temp.powweb.com/Proclamation2006_MayJun.pdf

While looking for things on this issue and Ellen White's amalgamation theory
that certain races of humans resulted from mating between humans and animals
(http://tinyurl.com/phhp5), I found a few statements made by Samuele
Bacchiocchi that put him in the category of Adventist I describe above.

In his Endtime Issues No. 74, 6 September 2001
(http://biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/eti_74.html), he says the
following regarding her amalgamation theory:

********************
Whether or not Ellen White's statements about the amalgamation between
humans and animals, are correct or incorrect, it is not for me to decide. No
one knows what happen before the Flood. All what Scripture tells is that
"the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and every imagination of the
thoughts of his heart was only evil continually" [Gen 6:5].
********************

As an aside, it's noteworthy that Bacchiocchi won't comment on whether or
not her views that human-animal mating resulted in some of the human races
we have today. Considering that he has plainly said that she is incorrect
on other issues (http://tinyurl.com/puaxo), why side-step this one?

And he says nobody knows what happened before the flood. If he was aware of
what Ellen White wrote, he'd know she referred to both the time before the
flood, and the time after it.

He goes on:

********************
Do Inspired Writers Make Mistakes?

The method used to discredit Ellen White has been repeatedly used by critics
to discredit the Bible. They point to the alleged mistakes and
contradictions found in the Bible. This strategy is based on the popular
assumption that people inspired by God never made a mistake, because they
were constantly supervised by the Holy Spirit in everything they said or
wrote. This popular assumption is faulty because it ignore the mysterious
blending of the human and divine elements present in inspired writers. A
careful reading of Scripture confronts us with the presence of the human
element.
********************

So he defends the criticism of the Bible. It's necessary. He can't
continue with Ellen White as a prophet without degrading the Bible's status.

The issue of the "mysterious blending of the human and divine elements" is
well-covered in the Proclamation! article. I recommend that you read it.
http://tinyurl.com/qbtf8 If you also want to see other back issues -
http://www.formeradventist.com/proclamationBack.html

Bacchiocchi then gives an example from the Bible:

********************
To illustrate this point, let us consider Paul's counsel found in 1
Corinthians 7:8: "To the unmarried and the widow I say that it is well for
them to remain single as I do." There is no question that Paul's terse
advice contradicts God's explicit statement: "It is not good that the man
should be alone" [Gen 2:18]. If God Himself stated at creation that living
alone without a marital partner "is not good," what business did Paul have
to encourage people to remain single like himself? Would it not have been
wiser for Paul to keep his personal opinion to himself?

Undoubtedly Paul did not foresee the problems his personal advice would
cause during the course of Christian history.
********************

Further on, Bacchiocchi makes this astounding statement -

********************
Frankly, I wish that the Holy Spirit had restrained Paul from expressing his
personal views and also guided him to write with greater clarity on such
important issues as the relationship between law and grace. Countless
scholars have tried to reconcile the apparent contradictions between Paul's
negation of the law [Rom 3:28] on one hand and affirmation of the law [1 Cor
7:19] on the other hand. Much of the existing confusion could have been
avoided if the Holy Spirit had controlled Paul's mind and literary style, to
ensure that the apostle would define relationship between law and grace with
clarity and simplicity for the lay person to understand.

It is evident that this is not the way God chooses to operate. He does not
suppress the individual freedom, even when writing about eternal truths.
What this means is that we do not reject Paul's writings and discredit his
ministry because some of the things he wrote are unacceptable.
********************

Some of the things Paul wrote are unacceptable, says Bacchiocchi.

Enough said.
--
Stephen Korsman
website: http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/
blog: http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/

IC | XC
---------
NI | KA

add an s before .co.za
Andrew
2006-07-08 18:38:15 UTC
Permalink
The Bible is a clear guide for everyone, but Catholicism in its history has
tried to removed it from the people, because it rebukes their idolatry and
exposes their superstitions.

The Bible reveals Jesus Christ who will hear our confessions and remove
all of our sins without our doing works of penance. The Bible reveals the
glorious hope of eternal life without prior ages of suffering in the Catholic
purgatory.

Shackles are removed through the glorious light of its pages. That is
why false religions hate it, because it sets free their captive prisoners.



~ Andrew
Teresita
2006-07-08 19:12:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
The Bible is a clear guide for everyone, but Catholicism in its history has
tried to removed it from the people, because it rebukes their idolatry and
exposes their superstitions.
Jesuit Andrew talks about Roman Catholic idolatry and superstition!

But Ellenolatry
and the belief that masturbation kills people
are horses of a different color!
Stephen Korsman
2006-07-08 19:48:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Teresita
Post by Andrew
The Bible is a clear guide for everyone, but Catholicism in its history has
tried to removed it from the people, because it rebukes their idolatry and
exposes their superstitions.
Jesuit Andrew talks about Roman Catholic idolatry and superstition!
But Ellenolatry
and the belief that masturbation kills people
are horses of a different color!
Maybe even amalgamated humans of a different colour!

God bless,
Stephen
--
Stephen Korsman
website: http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/
blog: http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/

IC | XC
---------
NI | KA

add an s before .co.za
Whazit Tooyah
2006-07-09 03:10:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen Korsman
Post by Teresita
Post by Andrew
The Bible is a clear guide for everyone, but Catholicism in its history has
tried to removed it from the people, because it rebukes their idolatry
and
Post by Teresita
Post by Andrew
exposes their superstitions.
Jesuit Andrew talks about Roman Catholic idolatry and superstition!
But Ellenolatry
and the belief that masturbation kills people
are horses of a different color!
Maybe even amalgamated humans of a different colour!
Amalgamation and horses---is that what that guy in Enumclaw was trying a few
years ago?
--
WT

By this all men will know that you are My disciples,
if you have love for one another
Stephen Korsman
2006-07-08 19:07:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
The Bible is a clear guide for everyone, but Catholicism in its history has
tried to removed it from the people, because it rebukes their idolatry and
exposes their superstitions.
Nope - it was never removed from the people. When most people couldn't
read, it was preached, and turned into art. Bibles were chained down so
that they could be kept safe for those who could read - most people couldn't
afford to own one. Only those Bibles which were redone to say something
completely different (much like the New World Translation of the Jehovah's
Witnesses, and the Clear Word Bible of the Adventists) were banned. Today
those Bibles are recognised by Catholics and Protestants alike as being
seriously faulty and biased.
Post by Andrew
The Bible reveals Jesus Christ who will hear our confessions and remove
all of our sins without our doing works of penance. The Bible reveals the
glorious hope of eternal life without prior ages of suffering in the Catholic
purgatory.
The Bible calls us to repentance. Repentance is demonstrated by penance.
The Bible tells us about sanctification - that is what purgatory refers to.
When the evidence for that is provided, you refuse to discuss it. So don't
change the subject to one you are unwilling to discuss from the Bible when
your own prophet's errors are brought up, along with the tendency in your
church to rub the Bible into the dirt so that Ellen White can still look
good.

From my blog at
http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/post/index/226/Bacchiocchi--Some-things-Paul-wrote-are-unacceptable
(http://tinyurl.com/pdtd9)

Recently I've seen a fair bit written on how many Adventists tend to lower
the Bible in order to raise Ellen White to the same level. Ellen White's
writings are considered divinely inspired by some, a claim she herself made
for them. Because of the errors they contain, many Adventists who still
want to see her as inspired have taken to trying to demonstrate that similar
errors exist in the Bible. The intent is to show that not even God's
inspired prophets and writers in the Bible get things right all the time, so
Ellen White doesn't need to be any different.

I've got two articles on this phenomenon on my website -
Adventist pastor - Bible contains truth, but also "opinion" -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor01.html
Adventist pastor - uninspired statements by Paul in the Bible -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor02.html

The latest Proclamation! magazine of May/June 2006 has an excellent article
on this by Dr Verle Streifling. It can be found here:
http://formeradvent.temp.powweb.com/Proclamation2006_MayJun.pdf

While looking for things on this issue and Ellen White's amalgamation theory
that certain races of humans resulted from mating between humans and animals
(http://tinyurl.com/phhp5), I found a few statements made by Samuele
Bacchiocchi that put him in the category of Adventist I describe above.

In his Endtime Issues No. 74, 6 September 2001
(http://biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/eti_74.html), he says the
following regarding her amalgamation theory:

********************
Whether or not Ellen White's statements about the amalgamation between
humans and animals, are correct or incorrect, it is not for me to decide. No
one knows what happen before the Flood. All what Scripture tells is that
"the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and every imagination of the
thoughts of his heart was only evil continually" [Gen 6:5].
********************

As an aside, it's noteworthy that Bacchiocchi won't comment on whether or
not her views that human-animal mating resulted in some of the human races
we have today. Considering that he has plainly said that she is incorrect
on other issues (http://tinyurl.com/puaxo), why side-step this one?

And he says nobody knows what happened before the flood. If he was aware of
what Ellen White wrote, he'd know she referred to both the time before the
flood, and the time after it.

He goes on:

********************
Do Inspired Writers Make Mistakes?

The method used to discredit Ellen White has been repeatedly used by critics
to discredit the Bible. They point to the alleged mistakes and
contradictions found in the Bible. This strategy is based on the popular
assumption that people inspired by God never made a mistake, because they
were constantly supervised by the Holy Spirit in everything they said or
wrote. This popular assumption is faulty because it ignore the mysterious
blending of the human and divine elements present in inspired writers. A
careful reading of Scripture confronts us with the presence of the human
element.
********************

So he defends the criticism of the Bible. It's necessary. He can't
continue with Ellen White as a prophet without degrading the Bible's status.

The issue of the "mysterious blending of the human and divine elements" is
well-covered in the Proclamation! article. I recommend that you read it.
http://tinyurl.com/qbtf8 If you also want to see other back issues -
http://www.formeradventist.com/proclamationBack.html

Bacchiocchi then gives an example from the Bible:

********************
To illustrate this point, let us consider Paul's counsel found in 1
Corinthians 7:8: "To the unmarried and the widow I say that it is well for
them to remain single as I do." There is no question that Paul's terse
advice contradicts God's explicit statement: "It is not good that the man
should be alone" [Gen 2:18]. If God Himself stated at creation that living
alone without a marital partner "is not good," what business did Paul have
to encourage people to remain single like himself? Would it not have been
wiser for Paul to keep his personal opinion to himself?

Undoubtedly Paul did not foresee the problems his personal advice would
cause during the course of Christian history.
********************

Further on, Bacchiocchi makes this astounding statement -

********************
Frankly, I wish that the Holy Spirit had restrained Paul from expressing his
personal views and also guided him to write with greater clarity on such
important issues as the relationship between law and grace. Countless
scholars have tried to reconcile the apparent contradictions between Paul's
negation of the law [Rom 3:28] on one hand and affirmation of the law [1 Cor
7:19] on the other hand. Much of the existing confusion could have been
avoided if the Holy Spirit had controlled Paul's mind and literary style, to
ensure that the apostle would define relationship between law and grace with
clarity and simplicity for the lay person to understand.

It is evident that this is not the way God chooses to operate. He does not
suppress the individual freedom, even when writing about eternal truths.
What this means is that we do not reject Paul's writings and discredit his
ministry because some of the things he wrote are unacceptable.
********************

Some of the things Paul wrote are unacceptable, says Bacchiocchi.

Enough said.
--
Stephen Korsman
website: http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/
blog: http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/

IC | XC
---------
NI | KA

add an s before .co.za
Post by Andrew
The Bible is a clear guide for everyone, but Catholicism in its history has
tried to removed it from the people, because it rebukes their idolatry and
exposes their superstitions.
The Bible reveals Jesus Christ who will hear our confessions and remove
all of our sins without our doing works of penance. The Bible reveals the
glorious hope of eternal life without prior ages of suffering in the Catholic
purgatory.
Shackles are removed through the glorious light of its pages. That is
why false religions hate it, because it sets free their captive prisoners.
~ Andrew
Whazit Tooyah
2006-07-08 21:39:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen Korsman
Post by Andrew
The Bible is a clear guide for everyone, but Catholicism in its history
has
Post by Andrew
tried to removed it from the people, because it rebukes their idolatry and
exposes their superstitions.
Nope - it was never removed from the people. When most people couldn't
read, it was preached, and turned into art. Bibles were chained down so
that they could be kept safe for those who could read - most people couldn't
afford to own one.
If one were trying to keep it from the people, it would be better placed in
a cabinet, or deemed to holy for the laity to touch.
The Bible was hand copied which was expensive and the pulpit Bibles were
often ornately decorated and were by themselves valuable works of art.; of
course one couldn't just walk in and take it.
Post by Stephen Korsman
Only those Bibles which were redone to say something
completely different (much like the New World Translation of the Jehovah's
Witnesses, and the Clear Word Bible of the Adventists) were banned. Today
those Bibles are recognised by Catholics and Protestants alike as being
seriously faulty and biased.
Post by Andrew
The Bible reveals Jesus Christ who will hear our confessions and remove
all of our sins without our doing works of penance. The Bible reveals the
glorious hope of eternal life without prior ages of suffering in the
Catholic
Post by Andrew
purgatory.
The Bible calls us to repentance. Repentance is demonstrated by penance.
I don't find this concept in scripture. I look at the immediate acceptance
by the father of the prodigal and don't see penance there. In 2 Cor 2 Paul
instructs the people to forgive the one punished by casting out as
instructed in 1 Cor. No penance is asked for there. I John 1:8 says that
God is faithful and just and will forgive, no penance is mentioned here
either. I look st the Lord's prayer and see Jesus instructing His
disciples to ask for forgiveness from God and grant forgiveness to others
and see no penance.
Is 55:7" Let the wicked forsake his way and the unrighteous man his
thoughts; and let him return to the Lord, and He will have compassion on
him, and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon."

It seems the only penance in scripture is to turn away from one's sin and to
return to the Lord.
Post by Stephen Korsman
The Bible tells us about sanctification - that is what purgatory refers to.
I searched the Bible and could not find purgatory either. When I used the
New American Bible (a Catholic edition) I found purgatory only in two
footnotes.

2 Maccabees 12:42?? Turning to supplication, they prayed that the sinful
deed might be fully blotted out. The noble Judas warned the soldiers to keep
themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had
happened because of the sin of those who had fallen.

[footnote] [42-45] This is the earliest statement of the doctrine that
prayers (2 Macc 12:42) and sacrifices (2 Macc 12:43) for the dead are
efficacious. The statement is made here, however, only for the purpose of
proving that Judas believed in the resurrection of the just (2 Macc
7:9,14,23,36). That is, he believed that expiation could be made for certain
sins of otherwise good men-soldiers who had given their lives for God's
cause. Thus, they could share in the resurrection. His belief was similar
to, but not quite the same as, the Catholic doctrine of purgatory.

1 Cor 3:15?? But if someone's work is burned up, that one will suffer loss;
the person will be saved, but only as through fire.

[footnote] Will be saved: although Paul can envision very harsh divine
punishment (cf 1 Cor 3:17), he appears optimistic about the success of
divine corrective means both here and elsewhere (cf 1 Cor 5:5; 11:32
[discipline]). The text of 1 Cor 3:15 has sometimes been used to support the
notion of purgatory, though it does not envisage this.

With so little Biblical evidence, how can one accept this doctrine?
Purgatory seems to be some sort of afterlife penance.
Personal opinion here: I believe the doctrine of purgatory was developed to
expand the justice and mercy of God in order to comfort those family
members whose deceased loved ones were clearly not being led by the Holy
Spirit. My daughter has rejected Christianity for now and is living very
worldly. If she were to die, I might feel more comforted by believing that
she is in an intermediate form of punishment and that by praying, fasting,
etc., I might get her out of purgatory and find her in heaven. or that after
a period of time determined by God she will be released. It is nice, but
it is not what the Bible says.
--
WT

By this all men will know that you are My disciples,
if you have love for one another
Post by Stephen Korsman
When the evidence for that is provided, you refuse to discuss it. So don't
change the subject to one you are unwilling to discuss from the Bible when
your own prophet's errors are brought up, along with the tendency in your
church to rub the Bible into the dirt so that Ellen White can still look
good.
From my blog at
http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/post/index/226/Bacchiocchi--Some-things-Paul-wrote-are-unacceptable
(http://tinyurl.com/pdtd9)
Recently I've seen a fair bit written on how many Adventists tend to lower
the Bible in order to raise Ellen White to the same level. Ellen White's
writings are considered divinely inspired by some, a claim she herself made
for them. Because of the errors they contain, many Adventists who still
want to see her as inspired have taken to trying to demonstrate that similar
errors exist in the Bible. The intent is to show that not even God's
inspired prophets and writers in the Bible get things right all the time, so
Ellen White doesn't need to be any different.
I've got two articles on this phenomenon on my website -
Adventist pastor - Bible contains truth, but also "opinion" -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor01.html
Adventist pastor - uninspired statements by Paul in the Bible -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor02.html
The latest Proclamation! magazine of May/June 2006 has an excellent article
http://formeradvent.temp.powweb.com/Proclamation2006_MayJun.pdf
While looking for things on this issue and Ellen White's amalgamation theory
that certain races of humans resulted from mating between humans and animals
(http://tinyurl.com/phhp5), I found a few statements made by Samuele
Bacchiocchi that put him in the category of Adventist I describe above.
In his Endtime Issues No. 74, 6 September 2001
(http://biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/eti_74.html), he says the
********************
Whether or not Ellen White's statements about the amalgamation between
humans and animals, are correct or incorrect, it is not for me to decide. No
one knows what happen before the Flood. All what Scripture tells is that
"the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and every imagination of the
thoughts of his heart was only evil continually" [Gen 6:5].
********************
As an aside, it's noteworthy that Bacchiocchi won't comment on whether or
not her views that human-animal mating resulted in some of the human races
we have today. Considering that he has plainly said that she is incorrect
on other issues (http://tinyurl.com/puaxo), why side-step this one?
And he says nobody knows what happened before the flood. If he was aware of
what Ellen White wrote, he'd know she referred to both the time before the
flood, and the time after it.
********************
Do Inspired Writers Make Mistakes?
The method used to discredit Ellen White has been repeatedly used by critics
to discredit the Bible. They point to the alleged mistakes and
contradictions found in the Bible. This strategy is based on the popular
assumption that people inspired by God never made a mistake, because they
were constantly supervised by the Holy Spirit in everything they said or
wrote. This popular assumption is faulty because it ignore the mysterious
blending of the human and divine elements present in inspired writers. A
careful reading of Scripture confronts us with the presence of the human
element.
********************
So he defends the criticism of the Bible. It's necessary. He can't
continue with Ellen White as a prophet without degrading the Bible's status.
The issue of the "mysterious blending of the human and divine elements" is
well-covered in the Proclamation! article. I recommend that you read it.
http://tinyurl.com/qbtf8 If you also want to see other back issues -
http://www.formeradventist.com/proclamationBack.html
********************
To illustrate this point, let us consider Paul's counsel found in 1
Corinthians 7:8: "To the unmarried and the widow I say that it is well for
them to remain single as I do." There is no question that Paul's terse
advice contradicts God's explicit statement: "It is not good that the man
should be alone" [Gen 2:18]. If God Himself stated at creation that living
alone without a marital partner "is not good," what business did Paul have
to encourage people to remain single like himself? Would it not have been
wiser for Paul to keep his personal opinion to himself?
Undoubtedly Paul did not foresee the problems his personal advice would
cause during the course of Christian history.
********************
Further on, Bacchiocchi makes this astounding statement -
********************
Frankly, I wish that the Holy Spirit had restrained Paul from expressing his
personal views and also guided him to write with greater clarity on such
important issues as the relationship between law and grace. Countless
scholars have tried to reconcile the apparent contradictions between Paul's
negation of the law [Rom 3:28] on one hand and affirmation of the law [1 Cor
7:19] on the other hand. Much of the existing confusion could have been
avoided if the Holy Spirit had controlled Paul's mind and literary style, to
ensure that the apostle would define relationship between law and grace with
clarity and simplicity for the lay person to understand.
It is evident that this is not the way God chooses to operate. He does not
suppress the individual freedom, even when writing about eternal truths.
What this means is that we do not reject Paul's writings and discredit his
ministry because some of the things he wrote are unacceptable.
********************
Some of the things Paul wrote are unacceptable, says Bacchiocchi.
Enough said.
--
Stephen Korsman
website: http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/
blog: http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/
IC | XC
---------
NI | KA
add an s before .co.za
Post by Andrew
The Bible is a clear guide for everyone, but Catholicism in its history
has
Post by Andrew
tried to removed it from the people, because it rebukes their idolatry and
exposes their superstitions.
The Bible reveals Jesus Christ who will hear our confessions and remove
all of our sins without our doing works of penance. The Bible reveals the
glorious hope of eternal life without prior ages of suffering in the
Catholic
Post by Andrew
purgatory.
Shackles are removed through the glorious light of its pages. That is
why false religions hate it, because it sets free their captive
prisoners.
Post by Andrew
~ Andrew
Stephen Korsman
2006-07-09 00:10:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Stephen Korsman
Post by Andrew
The Bible is a clear guide for everyone, but Catholicism in its history
has
Post by Andrew
tried to removed it from the people, because it rebukes their idolatry and
exposes their superstitions.
Nope - it was never removed from the people. When most people couldn't
read, it was preached, and turned into art. Bibles were chained down so
that they could be kept safe for those who could read - most people couldn't
afford to own one.
If one were trying to keep it from the people, it would be better placed in
a cabinet, or deemed to holy for the laity to touch.
The Bible was hand copied which was expensive and the pulpit Bibles were
often ornately decorated and were by themselves valuable works of art.; of
course one couldn't just walk in and take it.
Post by Stephen Korsman
Only those Bibles which were redone to say something
completely different (much like the New World Translation of the Jehovah's
Witnesses, and the Clear Word Bible of the Adventists) were banned.
Today
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Stephen Korsman
those Bibles are recognised by Catholics and Protestants alike as being
seriously faulty and biased.
Post by Andrew
The Bible reveals Jesus Christ who will hear our confessions and remove
all of our sins without our doing works of penance. The Bible reveals the
glorious hope of eternal life without prior ages of suffering in the
Catholic
Post by Andrew
purgatory.
The Bible calls us to repentance. Repentance is demonstrated by penance.
I don't find this concept in scripture. I look at the immediate acceptance
by the father of the prodigal and don't see penance there. In 2 Cor 2 Paul
instructs the people to forgive the one punished by casting out as
instructed in 1 Cor. No penance is asked for there. I John 1:8 says that
God is faithful and just and will forgive, no penance is mentioned here
either. I look st the Lord's prayer and see Jesus instructing His
disciples to ask for forgiveness from God and grant forgiveness to others
and see no penance.
Is 55:7" Let the wicked forsake his way and the unrighteous man his
thoughts; and let him return to the Lord, and He will have compassion on
him, and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon."
It seems the only penance in scripture is to turn away from one's sin and to
return to the Lord.
If one truly turns away from one's sin, prayer is good, developing one's
prayer life is better, and apologising to those you hurt is a good step to
becoming more Christ-like. That is the outward expression of one's
repentance. The fruits of that repentance. If we repent, and don't act
differently, or don't bother praying, or changing, it's not real repentance.
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Stephen Korsman
The Bible tells us about sanctification - that is what purgatory refers to.
I searched the Bible and could not find purgatory either. When I used the
New American Bible (a Catholic edition) I found purgatory only in two
footnotes.
2 Maccabees 12:42?? Turning to supplication, they prayed that the sinful
deed might be fully blotted out. The noble Judas warned the soldiers to keep
themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had
happened because of the sin of those who had fallen.
[footnote] [42-45] This is the earliest statement of the doctrine that
prayers (2 Macc 12:42) and sacrifices (2 Macc 12:43) for the dead are
efficacious. The statement is made here, however, only for the purpose of
proving that Judas believed in the resurrection of the just (2 Macc
7:9,14,23,36). That is, he believed that expiation could be made for certain
sins of otherwise good men-soldiers who had given their lives for God's
cause. Thus, they could share in the resurrection. His belief was similar
to, but not quite the same as, the Catholic doctrine of purgatory.
1 Cor 3:15?? But if someone's work is burned up, that one will suffer loss;
the person will be saved, but only as through fire.
[footnote] Will be saved: although Paul can envision very harsh divine
punishment (cf 1 Cor 3:17), he appears optimistic about the success of
divine corrective means both here and elsewhere (cf 1 Cor 5:5; 11:32
[discipline]). The text of 1 Cor 3:15 has sometimes been used to support the
notion of purgatory, though it does not envisage this.
With so little Biblical evidence, how can one accept this doctrine?
Purgatory seems to be some sort of afterlife penance.
After death, repentance is no longer possible, and so the demonstration of
it is not needed. But in this life we are on a road towards full
perfection, becoming more like Christ. Generally, Protestants call that
sanctification. We see no evidence that, at death, incomplete
sanctification is not completed in someone who is saved. Whether it's an
instantaneous completion, or a finishing process that takes some time, isn't
defined in Catholic teaching. Even whether or not it contains suffering is
not certain - although sanctification in this life is not always easy, and
is a learning process, and that is why it usually gets depicted that way.
Simply confronting God, and coming to a full realisation of what sin is, and
what our habits and tendencies truly mean to him, and realising in a way
that we can't understand in this existence the true nature of evil, we'll be
purged of the remaining things we need to unlearn simply from the shock of
it. For me, that final step in the process of sanctification is what
purgatory is about. But we can't know until we get there. What we can know
is that here we have a tendency to sin; there we don't, and that difference
is God's doing, not ours.
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Personal opinion here: I believe the doctrine of purgatory was developed to
expand the justice and mercy of God in order to comfort those family
members whose deceased loved ones were clearly not being led by the Holy
Spirit.
Not quite ... it was an explanation of how sanctification gets completed.
For those who reject the Holy Spirit, there is no remedy after death.
Post by Whazit Tooyah
My daughter has rejected Christianity for now and is living very
worldly. If she were to die, I might feel more comforted by believing that
she is in an intermediate form of punishment and that by praying, fasting,
etc., I might get her out of purgatory and find her in heaven. or that after
a period of time determined by God she will be released. It is nice, but
it is not what the Bible says.
I'll pray for your daughter!

God bless,
Stephen
--
Stephen Korsman
website: http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/
blog: http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/

IC | XC
---------
NI | KA

add an s before .co.za
Whazit Tooyah
2006-07-09 02:46:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen Korsman
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Stephen Korsman
Post by Andrew
The Bible is a clear guide for everyone, but Catholicism in its history
has
Post by Andrew
tried to removed it from the people, because it rebukes their idolatry and
exposes their superstitions.
Nope - it was never removed from the people. When most people couldn't
read, it was preached, and turned into art. Bibles were chained down so
that they could be kept safe for those who could read - most people couldn't
afford to own one.
If one were trying to keep it from the people, it would be better placed
in
Post by Whazit Tooyah
a cabinet, or deemed to holy for the laity to touch.
The Bible was hand copied which was expensive and the pulpit Bibles were
often ornately decorated and were by themselves valuable works of art.; of
course one couldn't just walk in and take it.
Post by Stephen Korsman
Only those Bibles which were redone to say something
completely different (much like the New World Translation of the
Jehovah's
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Stephen Korsman
Witnesses, and the Clear Word Bible of the Adventists) were banned.
Today
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Stephen Korsman
those Bibles are recognised by Catholics and Protestants alike as being
seriously faulty and biased.
Post by Andrew
The Bible reveals Jesus Christ who will hear our confessions and remove
all of our sins without our doing works of penance. The Bible reveals
the
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Stephen Korsman
Post by Andrew
glorious hope of eternal life without prior ages of suffering in the
Catholic
Post by Andrew
purgatory.
The Bible calls us to repentance. Repentance is demonstrated by
penance.
Post by Whazit Tooyah
I don't find this concept in scripture. I look at the immediate
acceptance
Post by Whazit Tooyah
by the father of the prodigal and don't see penance there. In 2 Cor 2 Paul
instructs the people to forgive the one punished by casting out as
instructed in 1 Cor. No penance is asked for there. I John 1:8 says that
God is faithful and just and will forgive, no penance is mentioned here
either. I look st the Lord's prayer and see Jesus instructing His
disciples to ask for forgiveness from God and grant forgiveness to others
and see no penance.
Is 55:7" Let the wicked forsake his way and the unrighteous man his
thoughts; and let him return to the Lord, and He will have compassion on
him, and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon."
It seems the only penance in scripture is to turn away from one's sin and
to
Post by Whazit Tooyah
return to the Lord.
If one truly turns away from one's sin, prayer is good, developing one's
prayer life is better, and apologising to those you hurt is a good step to
becoming more Christ-like. That is the outward expression of one's
repentance. The fruits of that repentance. If we repent, and don't act
differently, or don't bother praying, or changing, it's not real repentance.
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Stephen Korsman
The Bible tells us about sanctification - that is what purgatory refers to.
I searched the Bible and could not find purgatory either. When I used the
New American Bible (a Catholic edition) I found purgatory only in two
footnotes.
2 Maccabees 12:42?? Turning to supplication, they prayed that the sinful
deed might be fully blotted out. The noble Judas warned the soldiers to
keep
Post by Whazit Tooyah
themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had
happened because of the sin of those who had fallen.
[footnote] [42-45] This is the earliest statement of the doctrine that
prayers (2 Macc 12:42) and sacrifices (2 Macc 12:43) for the dead are
efficacious. The statement is made here, however, only for the purpose of
proving that Judas believed in the resurrection of the just (2 Macc
7:9,14,23,36). That is, he believed that expiation could be made for
certain
Post by Whazit Tooyah
sins of otherwise good men-soldiers who had given their lives for God's
cause. Thus, they could share in the resurrection. His belief was similar
to, but not quite the same as, the Catholic doctrine of purgatory.
1 Cor 3:15?? But if someone's work is burned up, that one will suffer
loss;
Post by Whazit Tooyah
the person will be saved, but only as through fire.
[footnote] Will be saved: although Paul can envision very harsh divine
punishment (cf 1 Cor 3:17), he appears optimistic about the success of
divine corrective means both here and elsewhere (cf 1 Cor 5:5; 11:32
[discipline]). The text of 1 Cor 3:15 has sometimes been used to support
the
Post by Whazit Tooyah
notion of purgatory, though it does not envisage this.
With so little Biblical evidence, how can one accept this doctrine?
Purgatory seems to be some sort of afterlife penance.
After death, repentance is no longer possible, and so the demonstration of
it is not needed. But in this life we are on a road towards full
perfection, becoming more like Christ. Generally, Protestants call that
sanctification. We see no evidence that, at death, incomplete
sanctification is not completed in someone who is saved. Whether it's an
instantaneous completion, or a finishing process that takes some time, isn't
defined in Catholic teaching. Even whether or not it contains suffering is
not certain - although sanctification in this life is not always easy, and
is a learning process, and that is why it usually gets depicted that way.
Simply confronting God, and coming to a full realisation of what sin is, and
what our habits and tendencies truly mean to him, and realising in a way
that we can't understand in this existence the true nature of evil, we'll be
purged of the remaining things we need to unlearn simply from the shock of
it. For me, that final step in the process of sanctification is what
purgatory is about. But we can't know until we get there. What we can know
is that here we have a tendency to sin; there we don't, and that difference
is God's doing, not ours.
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Personal opinion here: I believe the doctrine of purgatory was developed
to
Post by Whazit Tooyah
expand the justice and mercy of God in order to comfort those family
members whose deceased loved ones were clearly not being led by the Holy
Spirit.
Not quite ... it was an explanation of how sanctification gets completed.
For those who reject the Holy Spirit, there is no remedy after death.
Post by Whazit Tooyah
My daughter has rejected Christianity for now and is living very
worldly. If she were to die, I might feel more comforted by believing
that
Post by Whazit Tooyah
she is in an intermediate form of punishment and that by praying, fasting,
etc., I might get her out of purgatory and find her in heaven. or that
after
Post by Whazit Tooyah
a period of time determined by God she will be released. It is nice, but
it is not what the Bible says.
I'll pray for your daughter!
Thank you!
Post by Stephen Korsman
God bless,
Stephen
--
Stephen Korsman
website: http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/
blog: http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/
IC | XC
---------
NI | KA
add an s before .co.za
ka6uup
2006-07-09 05:33:02 UTC
Permalink
You really need to get a life
Post by Stephen Korsman
From my blog at
http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/post/index/226/Bacchiocchi--Some-things-Paul-wrote-are-unacceptable
(http://tinyurl.com/pdtd9)
Recently I've seen a fair bit written on how many Adventists tend to lower
the Bible in order to raise Ellen White to the same level. Ellen White's
writings are considered divinely inspired by some, a claim she herself made
for them. Because of the errors they contain, many Adventists who still
want to see her as inspired have taken to trying to demonstrate that similar
errors exist in the Bible. The intent is to show that not even God's
inspired prophets and writers in the Bible get things right all the time, so
Ellen White doesn't need to be any different.
I've got two articles on this phenomenon on my website -
Adventist pastor - Bible contains truth, but also "opinion" -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor01.html
Adventist pastor - uninspired statements by Paul in the Bible -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor02.html
The latest Proclamation! magazine of May/June 2006 has an excellent article
http://formeradvent.temp.powweb.com/Proclamation2006_MayJun.pdf
While looking for things on this issue and Ellen White's amalgamation theory
that certain races of humans resulted from mating between humans and animals
(http://tinyurl.com/phhp5), I found a few statements made by Samuele
Bacchiocchi that put him in the category of Adventist I describe above.
In his Endtime Issues No. 74, 6 September 2001
(http://biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/eti_74.html), he says the
********************
Whether or not Ellen White's statements about the amalgamation between
humans and animals, are correct or incorrect, it is not for me to decide. No
one knows what happen before the Flood. All what Scripture tells is that
"the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and every imagination of the
thoughts of his heart was only evil continually" [Gen 6:5].
********************
As an aside, it's noteworthy that Bacchiocchi won't comment on whether or
not her views that human-animal mating resulted in some of the human races
we have today. Considering that he has plainly said that she is incorrect
on other issues (http://tinyurl.com/puaxo), why side-step this one?
And he says nobody knows what happened before the flood. If he was aware of
what Ellen White wrote, he'd know she referred to both the time before the
flood, and the time after it.
********************
Do Inspired Writers Make Mistakes?
The method used to discredit Ellen White has been repeatedly used by critics
to discredit the Bible. They point to the alleged mistakes and
contradictions found in the Bible. This strategy is based on the popular
assumption that people inspired by God never made a mistake, because they
were constantly supervised by the Holy Spirit in everything they said or
wrote. This popular assumption is faulty because it ignore the mysterious
blending of the human and divine elements present in inspired writers. A
careful reading of Scripture confronts us with the presence of the human
element.
********************
So he defends the criticism of the Bible. It's necessary. He can't
continue with Ellen White as a prophet without degrading the Bible's status.
The issue of the "mysterious blending of the human and divine elements" is
well-covered in the Proclamation! article. I recommend that you read it.
http://tinyurl.com/qbtf8 If you also want to see other back issues -
http://www.formeradventist.com/proclamationBack.html
********************
To illustrate this point, let us consider Paul's counsel found in 1
Corinthians 7:8: "To the unmarried and the widow I say that it is well for
them to remain single as I do." There is no question that Paul's terse
advice contradicts God's explicit statement: "It is not good that the man
should be alone" [Gen 2:18]. If God Himself stated at creation that living
alone without a marital partner "is not good," what business did Paul have
to encourage people to remain single like himself? Would it not have been
wiser for Paul to keep his personal opinion to himself?
Undoubtedly Paul did not foresee the problems his personal advice would
cause during the course of Christian history.
********************
Further on, Bacchiocchi makes this astounding statement -
********************
Frankly, I wish that the Holy Spirit had restrained Paul from expressing his
personal views and also guided him to write with greater clarity on such
important issues as the relationship between law and grace. Countless
scholars have tried to reconcile the apparent contradictions between Paul's
negation of the law [Rom 3:28] on one hand and affirmation of the law [1 Cor
7:19] on the other hand. Much of the existing confusion could have been
avoided if the Holy Spirit had controlled Paul's mind and literary style, to
ensure that the apostle would define relationship between law and grace with
clarity and simplicity for the lay person to understand.
It is evident that this is not the way God chooses to operate. He does not
suppress the individual freedom, even when writing about eternal truths.
What this means is that we do not reject Paul's writings and discredit his
ministry because some of the things he wrote are unacceptable.
********************
Some of the things Paul wrote are unacceptable, says Bacchiocchi.
Enough said.
Stephen Korsman
2006-07-09 09:14:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by ka6uup
You really need to get a life
Lol! Adventism should drop Ellen White, rather.
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
From my blog at
http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/post/index/226/Bacchiocchi--Some-things-Paul-wrote-are-unacceptable
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
(http://tinyurl.com/pdtd9)
Recently I've seen a fair bit written on how many Adventists tend to lower
the Bible in order to raise Ellen White to the same level. Ellen White's
writings are considered divinely inspired by some, a claim she herself made
for them. Because of the errors they contain, many Adventists who still
want to see her as inspired have taken to trying to demonstrate that similar
errors exist in the Bible. The intent is to show that not even God's
inspired prophets and writers in the Bible get things right all the time, so
Ellen White doesn't need to be any different.
I've got two articles on this phenomenon on my website -
Adventist pastor - Bible contains truth, but also "opinion" -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor01.html
Adventist pastor - uninspired statements by Paul in the Bible -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor02.html
The latest Proclamation! magazine of May/June 2006 has an excellent article
http://formeradvent.temp.powweb.com/Proclamation2006_MayJun.pdf
While looking for things on this issue and Ellen White's amalgamation theory
that certain races of humans resulted from mating between humans and animals
(http://tinyurl.com/phhp5), I found a few statements made by Samuele
Bacchiocchi that put him in the category of Adventist I describe above.
In his Endtime Issues No. 74, 6 September 2001
(http://biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/eti_74.html), he says the
********************
Whether or not Ellen White's statements about the amalgamation between
humans and animals, are correct or incorrect, it is not for me to decide. No
one knows what happen before the Flood. All what Scripture tells is that
"the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and every imagination of the
thoughts of his heart was only evil continually" [Gen 6:5].
********************
As an aside, it's noteworthy that Bacchiocchi won't comment on whether or
not her views that human-animal mating resulted in some of the human races
we have today. Considering that he has plainly said that she is incorrect
on other issues (http://tinyurl.com/puaxo), why side-step this one?
And he says nobody knows what happened before the flood. If he was aware of
what Ellen White wrote, he'd know she referred to both the time before the
flood, and the time after it.
********************
Do Inspired Writers Make Mistakes?
The method used to discredit Ellen White has been repeatedly used by critics
to discredit the Bible. They point to the alleged mistakes and
contradictions found in the Bible. This strategy is based on the popular
assumption that people inspired by God never made a mistake, because they
were constantly supervised by the Holy Spirit in everything they said or
wrote. This popular assumption is faulty because it ignore the mysterious
blending of the human and divine elements present in inspired writers. A
careful reading of Scripture confronts us with the presence of the human
element.
********************
So he defends the criticism of the Bible. It's necessary. He can't
continue with Ellen White as a prophet without degrading the Bible's status.
The issue of the "mysterious blending of the human and divine elements" is
well-covered in the Proclamation! article. I recommend that you read it.
http://tinyurl.com/qbtf8 If you also want to see other back issues -
http://www.formeradventist.com/proclamationBack.html
********************
To illustrate this point, let us consider Paul's counsel found in 1
Corinthians 7:8: "To the unmarried and the widow I say that it is well for
them to remain single as I do." There is no question that Paul's terse
advice contradicts God's explicit statement: "It is not good that the man
should be alone" [Gen 2:18]. If God Himself stated at creation that living
alone without a marital partner "is not good," what business did Paul have
to encourage people to remain single like himself? Would it not have been
wiser for Paul to keep his personal opinion to himself?
Undoubtedly Paul did not foresee the problems his personal advice would
cause during the course of Christian history.
********************
Further on, Bacchiocchi makes this astounding statement -
********************
Frankly, I wish that the Holy Spirit had restrained Paul from expressing his
personal views and also guided him to write with greater clarity on such
important issues as the relationship between law and grace. Countless
scholars have tried to reconcile the apparent contradictions between Paul's
negation of the law [Rom 3:28] on one hand and affirmation of the law [1 Cor
7:19] on the other hand. Much of the existing confusion could have been
avoided if the Holy Spirit had controlled Paul's mind and literary style, to
ensure that the apostle would define relationship between law and grace with
clarity and simplicity for the lay person to understand.
It is evident that this is not the way God chooses to operate. He does not
suppress the individual freedom, even when writing about eternal truths.
What this means is that we do not reject Paul's writings and discredit his
ministry because some of the things he wrote are unacceptable.
********************
Some of the things Paul wrote are unacceptable, says Bacchiocchi.
Enough said.
Whazit Tooyah
2006-07-09 20:28:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen Korsman
Post by ka6uup
You really need to get a life
Lol! Adventism should drop Ellen White, rather.
There is no rational reason for Adventists to hold on to Ellen White as a
prophet of God. Her writings are more and more a source of embarrassment to
the church. One would think that a rational approach would be to put EGW on
a back burner (or off the stove altogether) and focus on the doctrines they
believe are biblically supported. If a doctrine won't stand without the
help of EGW, then they should abandon it as past error. Other churches have
done just that; the WWCOG as an organization abandoned much of Armstrongism
and have moved toward the center of evangelical teaching. Other churches in
a less dramatic way have moved away from the legalism that marked so much of
Christianity in the past.

I had some correspondence with an SDA missionary to Sri Lanka. He reported
on his success on teaching the locals about clean and unclean foods and
about keeping the Sabbath. I asked him about his success in teaching the
message of salvation. His reply saddened me, he wrote, "The Adventist
message is so much more than that." I stopped my support for him after that
reply. Because of him there will likely be a bunch of Sabbath keeping,
kosher eating Sri Lankans in hell. Without the message of salvation through
Christ, the Sabbath and keeping kosher are meaningless. Yet is was these
messages that he chose to focus on, rather than Jesus. His reports never
mentioned anybody turning from paganism to Christ.
--
WT

By this all men will know that you are My disciples,
if you have love for one another
Post by Stephen Korsman
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
From my blog at
http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/post/index/226/Bacchiocchi--Some-things-Paul-wrote-are-unacceptable
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
(http://tinyurl.com/pdtd9)
Recently I've seen a fair bit written on how many Adventists tend to
lower
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
the Bible in order to raise Ellen White to the same level. Ellen
White's
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
writings are considered divinely inspired by some, a claim she herself
made
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
for them. Because of the errors they contain, many Adventists who still
want to see her as inspired have taken to trying to demonstrate that
similar
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
errors exist in the Bible. The intent is to show that not even God's
inspired prophets and writers in the Bible get things right all the
time, so
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
Ellen White doesn't need to be any different.
I've got two articles on this phenomenon on my website -
Adventist pastor - Bible contains truth, but also "opinion" -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor01.html
Adventist pastor - uninspired statements by Paul in the Bible -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor02.html
The latest Proclamation! magazine of May/June 2006 has an excellent
article
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
http://formeradvent.temp.powweb.com/Proclamation2006_MayJun.pdf
While looking for things on this issue and Ellen White's amalgamation
theory
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
that certain races of humans resulted from mating between humans and
animals
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
(http://tinyurl.com/phhp5), I found a few statements made by Samuele
Bacchiocchi that put him in the category of Adventist I describe above.
In his Endtime Issues No. 74, 6 September 2001
(http://biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/eti_74.html), he says the
********************
Whether or not Ellen White's statements about the amalgamation between
humans and animals, are correct or incorrect, it is not for me to
decide. No
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
one knows what happen before the Flood. All what Scripture tells is that
"the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and every imagination of
the
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
thoughts of his heart was only evil continually" [Gen 6:5].
********************
As an aside, it's noteworthy that Bacchiocchi won't comment on whether
or
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
not her views that human-animal mating resulted in some of the human
races
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
we have today. Considering that he has plainly said that she is
incorrect
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
on other issues (http://tinyurl.com/puaxo), why side-step this one?
And he says nobody knows what happened before the flood. If he was
aware of
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
what Ellen White wrote, he'd know she referred to both the time before
the
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
flood, and the time after it.
********************
Do Inspired Writers Make Mistakes?
The method used to discredit Ellen White has been repeatedly used by
critics
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
to discredit the Bible. They point to the alleged mistakes and
contradictions found in the Bible. This strategy is based on the popular
assumption that people inspired by God never made a mistake, because
they
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
were constantly supervised by the Holy Spirit in everything they said or
wrote. This popular assumption is faulty because it ignore the
mysterious
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
blending of the human and divine elements present in inspired writers. A
careful reading of Scripture confronts us with the presence of the human
element.
********************
So he defends the criticism of the Bible. It's necessary. He can't
continue with Ellen White as a prophet without degrading the Bible's
status.
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
The issue of the "mysterious blending of the human and divine elements"
is
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
well-covered in the Proclamation! article. I recommend that you read
it.
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
http://tinyurl.com/qbtf8 If you also want to see other back issues -
http://www.formeradventist.com/proclamationBack.html
********************
To illustrate this point, let us consider Paul's counsel found in 1
Corinthians 7:8: "To the unmarried and the widow I say that it is well
for
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
them to remain single as I do." There is no question that Paul's terse
advice contradicts God's explicit statement: "It is not good that the
man
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
should be alone" [Gen 2:18]. If God Himself stated at creation that
living
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
alone without a marital partner "is not good," what business did Paul
have
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
to encourage people to remain single like himself? Would it not have
been
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
wiser for Paul to keep his personal opinion to himself?
Undoubtedly Paul did not foresee the problems his personal advice would
cause during the course of Christian history.
********************
Further on, Bacchiocchi makes this astounding statement -
********************
Frankly, I wish that the Holy Spirit had restrained Paul from
expressing
his
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
personal views and also guided him to write with greater clarity on such
important issues as the relationship between law and grace. Countless
scholars have tried to reconcile the apparent contradictions between
Paul's
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
negation of the law [Rom 3:28] on one hand and affirmation of the law
[1
Cor
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
7:19] on the other hand. Much of the existing confusion could have been
avoided if the Holy Spirit had controlled Paul's mind and literary
style, to
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
ensure that the apostle would define relationship between law and grace
with
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
clarity and simplicity for the lay person to understand.
It is evident that this is not the way God chooses to operate. He does
not
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
suppress the individual freedom, even when writing about eternal truths.
What this means is that we do not reject Paul's writings and discredit
his
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
ministry because some of the things he wrote are unacceptable.
********************
Some of the things Paul wrote are unacceptable, says Bacchiocchi.
Enough said.
Andrew
2006-07-09 20:42:51 UTC
Permalink
Without the message of salvation through Christ,
the Sabbath and keeping kosher are meaningless.
This is true. But it is also true that your hatred of Adventism
and of EGW, without an emphasis on the love of Christ and
the message of salvation through Him, would be meaningless.


Andrew
Whazit Tooyah
2006-07-09 21:53:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Without the message of salvation through Christ,
the Sabbath and keeping kosher are meaningless.
This is true. But it is also true that your hatred of Adventism
and of EGW, without an emphasis on the love of Christ and
the message of salvation through Him, would be meaningless.
Andrew
Yes its true, I hate lies, liars and systems of lies!
Andrew
2006-07-09 22:12:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Andrew
Without the message of salvation through Christ,
the Sabbath and keeping kosher are meaningless.
This is true. But it is also true that your hatred of Adventism
and of EGW, without an emphasis on the love of Christ and
the message of salvation through Him, would be meaningless.
Andrew
Yes its true, I hate lies, liars and systems of lies!
Attempts to help those whom we perceive to be deceived by.."lies,
liars and systems of lies," without an emphasis on the transforming
love of Christ and the message of salvation through Him, would be
meaningless.



Andrew
Stephen Korsman
2006-07-10 04:21:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Andrew
Without the message of salvation through Christ,
the Sabbath and keeping kosher are meaningless.
This is true. But it is also true that your hatred of Adventism
and of EGW, without an emphasis on the love of Christ and
the message of salvation through Him, would be meaningless.
Andrew
Yes its true, I hate lies, liars and systems of lies!
Attempts to help those whom we perceive to be deceived by.."lies,
liars and systems of lies," without an emphasis on the transforming
love of Christ and the message of salvation through Him, would be
meaningless.
You're not the person to be speaking about lies, Andrew. You're the one who
refuses to represent Catholic teaching honestly. You've claimed things
about Catholicism, then seen the evidence that you're wrong, refused to
discuss it further, and then claimed the same things over and over again.
That can only be seen as deliberate.

http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/post/index/148/Andrew

Helping someone see the false teachings of their faith by its very nature
directs them to the truth of Christ's message.

God bless,
Stephen
--
Stephen Korsman
website: http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/
blog: http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/

IC | XC
---------
NI | KA

add an s before .co.za
Stephen Korsman
2006-07-10 04:25:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Stephen Korsman
Post by ka6uup
You really need to get a life
Lol! Adventism should drop Ellen White, rather.
There is no rational reason for Adventists to hold on to Ellen White as a
prophet of God. Her writings are more and more a source of embarrassment to
the church. One would think that a rational approach would be to put EGW on
a back burner (or off the stove altogether) and focus on the doctrines they
believe are biblically supported. If a doctrine won't stand without the
help of EGW, then they should abandon it as past error. Other churches have
done just that; the WWCOG as an organization abandoned much of
Armstrongism
Post by Whazit Tooyah
and have moved toward the center of evangelical teaching. Other churches in
a less dramatic way have moved away from the legalism that marked so much of
Christianity in the past.
Can you imagine what would happen if Adventism did that? It would result in
scores of little Kosher Church of the Sabbaths and Arian Church of Ellens
running around, independent of any General Conference, which would have
rejected all of that nonsense.
Post by Whazit Tooyah
I had some correspondence with an SDA missionary to Sri Lanka. He reported
on his success on teaching the locals about clean and unclean foods and
about keeping the Sabbath. I asked him about his success in teaching the
message of salvation. His reply saddened me, he wrote, "The Adventist
message is so much more than that." I stopped my support for him after that
reply. Because of him there will likely be a bunch of Sabbath keeping,
kosher eating Sri Lankans in hell. Without the message of salvation through
Christ, the Sabbath and keeping kosher are meaningless. Yet is was these
messages that he chose to focus on, rather than Jesus. His reports never
mentioned anybody turning from paganism to Christ.
My experience with Adventism has been very similar. There are exceptions,
but a lot tend to focus on the gospel of kosher food.

God bless,
Stephen
--
Stephen Korsman
website: http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/
blog: http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/

IC | XC
---------
NI | KA

add an s before .co.za
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Stephen Korsman
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
From my blog at
http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/post/index/226/Bacchiocchi--Some-things-Paul-wrote-are-unacceptable
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Stephen Korsman
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
(http://tinyurl.com/pdtd9)
Recently I've seen a fair bit written on how many Adventists tend to
lower
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
the Bible in order to raise Ellen White to the same level. Ellen
White's
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
writings are considered divinely inspired by some, a claim she herself
made
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
for them. Because of the errors they contain, many Adventists who still
want to see her as inspired have taken to trying to demonstrate that
similar
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
errors exist in the Bible. The intent is to show that not even God's
inspired prophets and writers in the Bible get things right all the
time, so
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
Ellen White doesn't need to be any different.
I've got two articles on this phenomenon on my website -
Adventist pastor - Bible contains truth, but also "opinion" -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor01.html
Adventist pastor - uninspired statements by Paul in the Bible -
http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/pastor02.html
The latest Proclamation! magazine of May/June 2006 has an excellent
article
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
http://formeradvent.temp.powweb.com/Proclamation2006_MayJun.pdf
While looking for things on this issue and Ellen White's amalgamation
theory
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
that certain races of humans resulted from mating between humans and
animals
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
(http://tinyurl.com/phhp5), I found a few statements made by Samuele
Bacchiocchi that put him in the category of Adventist I describe above.
In his Endtime Issues No. 74, 6 September 2001
(http://biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/eti_74.html), he says the
********************
Whether or not Ellen White's statements about the amalgamation between
humans and animals, are correct or incorrect, it is not for me to
decide. No
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
one knows what happen before the Flood. All what Scripture tells is that
"the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and every imagination of
the
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
thoughts of his heart was only evil continually" [Gen 6:5].
********************
As an aside, it's noteworthy that Bacchiocchi won't comment on whether
or
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
not her views that human-animal mating resulted in some of the human
races
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
we have today. Considering that he has plainly said that she is
incorrect
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
on other issues (http://tinyurl.com/puaxo), why side-step this one?
And he says nobody knows what happened before the flood. If he was
aware of
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
what Ellen White wrote, he'd know she referred to both the time before
the
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
flood, and the time after it.
********************
Do Inspired Writers Make Mistakes?
The method used to discredit Ellen White has been repeatedly used by
critics
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
to discredit the Bible. They point to the alleged mistakes and
contradictions found in the Bible. This strategy is based on the popular
assumption that people inspired by God never made a mistake, because
they
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
were constantly supervised by the Holy Spirit in everything they said or
wrote. This popular assumption is faulty because it ignore the
mysterious
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
blending of the human and divine elements present in inspired
writers.
Post by Whazit Tooyah
Post by Stephen Korsman
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
A
careful reading of Scripture confronts us with the presence of the human
element.
********************
So he defends the criticism of the Bible. It's necessary. He can't
continue with Ellen White as a prophet without degrading the Bible's
status.
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
The issue of the "mysterious blending of the human and divine elements"
is
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
well-covered in the Proclamation! article. I recommend that you read
it.
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
http://tinyurl.com/qbtf8 If you also want to see other back issues -
http://www.formeradventist.com/proclamationBack.html
********************
To illustrate this point, let us consider Paul's counsel found in 1
Corinthians 7:8: "To the unmarried and the widow I say that it is well
for
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
them to remain single as I do." There is no question that Paul's terse
advice contradicts God's explicit statement: "It is not good that the
man
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
should be alone" [Gen 2:18]. If God Himself stated at creation that
living
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
alone without a marital partner "is not good," what business did Paul
have
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
to encourage people to remain single like himself? Would it not have
been
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
wiser for Paul to keep his personal opinion to himself?
Undoubtedly Paul did not foresee the problems his personal advice would
cause during the course of Christian history.
********************
Further on, Bacchiocchi makes this astounding statement -
********************
Frankly, I wish that the Holy Spirit had restrained Paul from
expressing
his
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
personal views and also guided him to write with greater clarity on such
important issues as the relationship between law and grace. Countless
scholars have tried to reconcile the apparent contradictions between
Paul's
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
negation of the law [Rom 3:28] on one hand and affirmation of the law
[1
Cor
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
7:19] on the other hand. Much of the existing confusion could have been
avoided if the Holy Spirit had controlled Paul's mind and literary
style, to
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
ensure that the apostle would define relationship between law and grace
with
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
clarity and simplicity for the lay person to understand.
It is evident that this is not the way God chooses to operate. He does
not
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
suppress the individual freedom, even when writing about eternal truths.
What this means is that we do not reject Paul's writings and discredit
his
Post by ka6uup
Post by Stephen Korsman
ministry because some of the things he wrote are unacceptable.
********************
Some of the things Paul wrote are unacceptable, says Bacchiocchi.
Enough said.
Loading...