Seventh-day Adventists discover Bible Truth

[BobRyan]

A great many Christian denominations will join the Seventh-day Adventist church in affirming the fact that the Bible can be understood by reading it, by paying attention to context, by not not inserting one's own bias and preference into the text, by pray and the indwelling Spirit of God "guiding into all truth" John 16 .

So that is not an idea unique to SDAs.

We also know that a great many denominations will affirm the fact that given 3 people in a room studying one given topic they will agree on many easy and obvious Bible teachings but then can come to a text or a doctrine that is "less obvious". And when that happens they may get to 3 DIFFERING conclusions where each one is earnestly and honestly arriving at a different conclusion. But then after more deliberate study they all agree that one of the conclusion is more supportable in scripture than the others... and so once again "agreement".

again - not an idea unique to SDAs.

But there is a 3rd case where we have four people and even after doing a lot of pray and study they still have 4 different conclusions. None of the 4 conclusions are "evil" or "in rebellion" against God, they just see it differently than the other three. John 16 says the Holy Spirit will "guide you into all truth". Inspiration from God provides guidance and 1 Cor 14 shows the case of a lot of people having what Paul calls "the gift of prophecy" - where God the Holy Spirit Himself speaks through a given prophet as Numbers 12:6 and 2 Peter 1:20-21 remind us.

Where Adventist do differ with some groups is that in third case we "accept" the fact that the Holy Spirit Himself can speak to which of the 4 people in scenario 3 above are on the right track. And so given that gentle nudge the group can then put more effort into fleshing out the option already discovered and see where it is or is not supported when all is said and done.

The "problem" in the mind of "some" is that having the Holy Spirit give direct input in scenario #3 above - results in an extraordinary level of "unity" in the group.

Yet that is what we see in scripture - when prophets exist in a certain age of history - understanding of the Gospel , of the Word of God - takes a giant leap forward.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

A great many Christian denominations will join the Seventh-day Adventist church in affirming the fact that the Bible can be understood by reading it, by paying attention to context, by not not inserting one's own bias and preference into the text, by pray and the indwelling Spirit of God "guiding into all truth" John 16 .

Which denominations, specifically?

We also know that a great many denominations will affirm the fact that given 3 people in a room studying one given topic they will agree on many easy and obvious Bible teachings but then can come to a text or a doctrine that is "less obvious". And when that happens they may get to 3 DIFFERING conclusions where each one is earnestly and honestly arriving at a different conclusion. But then after more deliberate study they all agree that one of the conclusion is more supportable in scripture than the others... and so once again "agreement".

Why do you call this claim a fact?

John 16 says the Holy Spirit will "guide you into all truth".

Who, specifically, are the "you" in the passage?

Where Adventist do differ with some groups is that in third case we "accept" the fact that the Holy Spirit Himself can speak to which of the 4 people in scenario 3 above are on the right track. And so given that gentle nudge the group can then put more effort into fleshing out the option already discovered and see where it is or is not supported when all is said and done.

Why do you call this claim a fact?

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:

A great many Christian denominations will join the Seventh-day Adventist church in affirming the fact that the Bible can be understood by reading it, by paying attention to context, by not not inserting one's own bias and preference into the text, by pray and the indwelling Spirit of God "guiding into all truth" John 16

Which denominations, specifically?

Pretty much all Protestant Reformation ones, all Evangelical ones, Adventists etc.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:

We also know that a great many denominations will affirm the fact that given 3 people in a room studying one given topic they will agree on many easy and obvious Bible teachings but then can come to a text or a doctrine that is "less obvious".

Why do you call this claim a fact?

It is irrefutable.,

The is not the hard part of the discussion - we will get there.
============================

And when that happens they may get to 3 DIFFERING conclusions where each one is earnestly and honestly arriving at a different conclusion.

Why do you call this claim a fact?

It is irrefutable.,

The is not the hard part of the discussion - we will get there.
============================

But then after more deliberate study they all agree that one of the conclusion is more supportable in scripture than the others... and so once again "agreement".

Why do you call this claim a fact?

It is irrefutable.,

The is not the hard part of the discussion - we will get there.

Easy example - look at the Baptist Confession of Faith section 19 and compare it to the Westminster Confession of Faith section 19 to see agreement between different groups on certain points.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:

John 16 says the Holy Spirit will "guide you into all truth".

Who, specifically, are the "you" in the passage?

"you" is - Christ's followers - Christians in all ages.

So then as pointed out in the next chapter John 17
15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

Matt 28:19-20
19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

Matt 6:
7 “And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words. 8 So do not be like them; for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.
9 “Pray, then, in this way:
‘Our Father who is in heaven,
Hallowed be Your name.

Luke 11:
It happened that while Jesus was praying in a certain place, after He had finished, one of His disciples said to Him, “Lord, teach us to pray just as John also taught his disciples.” 2 And He said to them, “When you pray, say:
‘Father, hallowed be Your name.
Your kingdom come.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:

Where Adventist do differ with some groups is that in third case we "accept" the fact that the Holy Spirit Himself can speak to which of the 4 people in scenario 3 above are on the right track. And so given that gentle nudge the group can then put more effort into fleshing out the option already discovered and see where it is or is not supported when all is said and done.

Why do you call this claim a fact?

It is irrefutable that Seventh-day Adventists do differ "with some groups" on the statement above. This is irrefutable.

The cessationist groups will not accept divine revelation directing the group to one or the other solution - as in normal NT and OT prophets receiving messages from God for the church. This is irrefutable.

 

[pasifika]

A great many Christian denominations will join the Seventh-day Adventist church in affirming the fact that the Bible can be understood by reading it, by paying attention to context, by not not inserting one's own bias and preference into the text, by pray and the indwelling Spirit of God "guiding into all truth" John 16 .

So that is not an idea unique to SDAs.

We also know that a great many denominations will affirm the fact that given 3 people in a room studying one given topic they will agree on many easy and obvious Bible teachings but then can come to a text or a doctrine that is "less obvious". And when that happens they may get to 3 DIFFERING conclusions where each one is earnestly and honestly arriving at a different conclusion. But then after more deliberate study they all agree that one of the conclusion is more supportable in scripture than the others... and so once again "agreement".

again - not an idea unique to SDAs.

But there is a 3rd case where we have four people and even after doing a lot of pray and study they still have 4 different conclusions. None of the 4 conclusions are "evil" or "in rebellion" against God, they just see it differently than the other three. John 16 says the Holy Spirit will "guide you into all truth". Inspiration from God provides guidance and 1 Cor 14 shows the case of a lot of people having what Paul calls "the gift of prophecy" - where God the Holy Spirit Himself speaks through a given prophet as Numbers 12:6 and 2 Peter 1:20-21 remind us.

Where Adventist do differ with some groups is that in third case we "accept" the fact that the Holy Spirit Himself can speak to which of the 4 people in scenario 3 above are on the right track. And so given that gentle nudge the group can then put more effort into fleshing out the option already discovered and see where it is or is not supported when all is said and done.

The "problem" in the mind of "some" is that having the Holy Spirit give direct input in scenario #3 above - results in an extraordinary level of "unity" in the group.

Yet that is what we see in scripture - when prophets exist in a certain age of history - understanding of the Gospel , of the Word of God - takes a giant leap forward.

If you claim the sda discovers bible "Truth", then show the world that "Truth". Jesus is the "Way", the "Truth" etc. So if you're already witness to the "Truth" then you must support your testimony with "deeds" Not just claims without evidence.

The Pharisees and Teacher of the Law also made those remarks, and Paul said in Timothy those people ..."Don't know what they are talking about" 1 Timo 1:6-7

 

[BobRyan]

But there is a 3rd case where we have four people and even after doing a lot of pray and study they still have 4 different conclusions. None of the 4 conclusions are "evil" or "in rebellion" against God, they just see it differently than the other three. John 16 says the Holy Spirit will "guide you into all truth". Inspiration from God provides guidance and 1 Cor 14 shows the case of a lot of people having what Paul calls "the gift of prophecy" - where God the Holy Spirit Himself speaks through a given prophet as Numbers 12:6 and 2 Peter 1:20-21 remind us.

Where Adventist do differ with some groups is that in third case we "accept" the fact that the Holy Spirit Himself can speak to which of the 4 people in scenario 3 above are on the right track. And so given that gentle nudge the group can then put more effort into fleshing out the option already discovered and see where it is or is not supported when all is said and done.

The "problem" in the mind of "some" is that having the Holy Spirit give direct input in scenario #3 above - results in an extraordinary level of "unity" in the group.

Yet that is what we see in scripture - when prophets exist in a certain age of history - understanding of the Gospel , of the Word of God - takes a giant leap forward.

If you claim the sda discovers bible "Truth", then show the world that "Truth". Jesus is the "Way", the "Truth" etc.

And as noted in the OP the Holy Spirit will guide "INTO ALL Truth" rather than saying "you already have infinite knowledge no need to learn anything more".

I don't see this as the hard part.

Yes Jesus as infinite God is the Way the Truth and the Life.

So if you're already witness to the "Truth" then you must support your testimony with "deeds" Not just claims without evidence.

Well we do claim to have "The truth" about the 2nd coming, the millennium, the three angels messages in Rev 14, the rapture, the judgment in Dan 7 and in Rev 14:7, the great end-time deception event of Rev 13 and in Matt 24 and also given as a warning in 2 Thess 2,

The Pharisees and Teacher of the Law also made those remarks, and Paul said in Timothy those people ..."Don't know what they are talking about" 1 Timo 1:6-7

Indeed 1 Tim 1:6-7 does prove that "it is possible to be mistaken about something" - that is not the big surprise some have supposed it to be - apparently.

 

[BobRyan]

A great many Christian denominations will join the Seventh-day Adventist church in affirming the fact that the Bible can be understood by reading it, by paying attention to context, by not not inserting one's own bias and preference into the text, by pray and the indwelling Spirit of God "guiding into all truth" John 16 .

Which denominations, specifically?

Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, Evangelicals, Messianic Jews ...

 

[BobRyan]

John 16 says the Holy Spirit will "guide you into all truth".

Who, specifically, are the "you" in the passage?

John 17 says it is "all those who believe"
Matt 28:19 says to tell all mankind what Christ taught
Matt 6 says "When you pray.. say our Father who is in heaven.." so then it is the "same you".

 

[pasifika]

And as noted in the OP the Holy Spirit will guide "INTO ALL Truth" rather than saying "you already have infinite knowledge no need to learn anything more".

I don't see this as the hard part.

Yes Jesus as infinite God is the Way the Truth and the Life.

Well we do claim to have "The truth" about the 2nd coming, the millennium, the three angels messages in Rev 14, the rapture, the judgment in Dan 7 and in Rev 14:7, the great end-time deception event of Rev 13 and in Matt 24 and also given as a warning in 2 Thess 2,

Indeed 1 Tim 1:6-7 does prove that "it is possible to be mistaken about something" - that is not the big surprise some have supposed it to be - apparently.

Okay, I get it. It's your own claim does not mean it's the "real Truth". Anyone or Any denominations can make such claims. What's is important in my opinion if any denominations or individual claims to have bible Truth then I expect "Power" to be demonstrated i.e., can raise the dead, calm storm or tsunami etc, heal sickness that have no cure etc. As it says.."The Kingdom of God is Not about words (talking) But of Power..1 Corin 4

Taking into account that the founders of the SDA ie EG White, Miller etc were part of those who made false claims about the timing of the second coming. You might be repeating the same mistake. as it says "what happened to Isarel serve as a warning for us today.

 

[The Liturgist]

A great many Christian denominations will join the Seventh-day Adventist church in affirming the fact that the Bible can be understood by reading it, by paying attention to context, by not not inserting one's own bias and preference into the text, by pray and the indwelling Spirit of God "guiding into all truth" John 16

This is not a fact, it is an opinion, and it is an incorrect one as can be shown by the fact that Calvinism and non-Calvinism are both fully supportable using the same scriptures. As St. Peter said, no prophecy is an exposition of itself.

However, the main difference between the SDA church and other churches which believe the Bible can be understood by reading it, is that Baptists, Quakers, members of the Stone/Campbell movement churches (Church of Christ, and Christian Church/Disciples of Christ) is that the other denominations generally give their members the freedom to interpret the scriptures and permit a range of opinions, provided one stays within certain principles of the denomination, which in the case of the Stone/Campbell movement are strikingly minimalistic, while being more intense in Baptism where you have various confessions of faith, but still, the freedom of the individaul Baptist to interpret the Bible on their own is paramount. In the SDA church, it is an official doctrine that Ellen G. White is an inspired prophet, and therefore while Adventists may believe in Sola Scriptura, they also believe that Ellen G. White was entirely correct in interpreting scripture and therefore Adventists are taught to follow her interpretations, and are taught that her interpretation is what the correct one that flows naturally from the text, that it is Bible Truth, as you put it.

In reality, there are multiple ways of interpreting sacred scripture that are logically consistent, and most Sola Scriptura Christians do not come to the same conclusions as Adventists when reading the same scriptures, as even some Adventists such as our mutual friend @Adventist Heretic can attest.

 

[The Liturgist]

Presbyterians, Methodists,

Wrong. Methodists follow something called the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, which is derived from the Anglican Tripod of Scripture, Tradition and Reason - Methodist doctrine is based on Scripture, Tradition, Reason and Experience.

Likewise, most Calvinists before Karl Barth, including the original Presbyterians, and a great many today, look to the early church fathers for guidance in interpreting scripture, indeed, John Calvin was a very learned scholar of Patristics himself, by 17th century standards, and indeed the phrase consensus patrum was coined by Calvinist theologians, which is amusing given that early Calvinism deviates from the Consensus Patrum on issues like monergism and iconoclasm (fortunately iconoclasm and even monergism disappeared as a result of the 19th century emergence of Reformed Catholicism within the Calvinist denominations, and Karl Barth’s Neo-Orthodoxy which deprecated church tradition then appeared in response to that, and then Fundamentalism appeared in some Calvinist denominations as a less intellectually developed and more reactionary rejection of tradition.

However, the Presbyterian Church USA, the Church of Scotland, and many parishes of the Presbyterian Church of America, such as Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, have a great many parishes which are strongly influenced by church tradition and are highly liturgical.

I would be interested in the opinion of our beloved and enlightened liberal Presbyterian friend @hedrick on this issue.

 

[The Liturgist]

Pretty much all Protestant Reformation ones, all Evangelical ones, Adventists etc.

If by Pretty much you are excluding the largest ones, namely Anglicans, Lutherans, Calvinists and Wesleyan-related denominations such as Methodists, Wesleyans, the Salvation Army, Nazarenes, etc, in that order, then yes.

Really as I said the only denominations which share your radical interpretation are either the Radical Reformation denominations such as some Anabaptists, the Baptists, the Puritans, but not so much the later Congregationalists, and some of the Restorationists like the Quakers and the Stone/Campbell movement.

But the difference between those denominations and Adventism is that like the Lutherans, the Anglicans, the Calvinists and other Magisterial Protestants, Adventism has a magisterium in the form of the writings of EGW. The difference is that since Ellen G. White is officially recognized by Adventists as an inspired prophet and since she was a highly prolific author, writing on a vast array of topics, this has the effect of creating a standardized interpretation from which Adventists are discouraged from disagreeing with, as our friend @Adventist Heretic will attest.

 

[bbbbbbb]

A great many Christian denominations will join the Seventh-day Adventist church in affirming the fact that the Bible can be understood by reading it, by paying attention to context, by not not inserting one's own bias and preference into the text, by pray and the indwelling Spirit of God "guiding into all truth" John 16 .

So that is not an idea unique to SDAs.

We also know that a great many denominations will affirm the fact that given 3 people in a room studying one given topic they will agree on many easy and obvious Bible teachings but then can come to a text or a doctrine that is "less obvious". And when that happens they may get to 3 DIFFERING conclusions where each one is earnestly and honestly arriving at a different conclusion. But then after more deliberate study they all agree that one of the conclusion is more supportable in scripture than the others... and so once again "agreement".

again - not an idea unique to SDAs.

But there is a 3rd case where we have four people and even after doing a lot of pray and study they still have 4 different conclusions. None of the 4 conclusions are "evil" or "in rebellion" against God, they just see it differently than the other three. John 16 says the Holy Spirit will "guide you into all truth". Inspiration from God provides guidance and 1 Cor 14 shows the case of a lot of people having what Paul calls "the gift of prophecy" - where God the Holy Spirit Himself speaks through a given prophet as Numbers 12:6 and 2 Peter 1:20-21 remind us.

Where Adventist do differ with some groups is that in third case we "accept" the fact that the Holy Spirit Himself can speak to which of the 4 people in scenario 3 above are on the right track. And so given that gentle nudge the group can then put more effort into fleshing out the option already discovered and see where it is or is not supported when all is said and done.

The "problem" in the mind of "some" is that having the Holy Spirit give direct input in scenario #3 above - results in an extraordinary level of "unity" in the group.

Yet that is what we see in scripture - when prophets exist in a certain age of history - understanding of the Gospel , of the Word of God - takes a giant leap forward.

This really resonates with the followers of Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, Father Divine, etc., etc., etc.