Your sons and your daughters shall propesy

[maco]

Acts 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your young men shall see visions, your old men shall dream dreams.

The Bible says very clearly that God's Spirit will be poured out on all flesh and our sons and daughters shall prophesy. So why is it that the SDA has exalted Ellen White to the level she is when the Bible says that God will pour His Spirit out on all flesh? Why is it that Ellen White has the market cornered when it comes to the SOP scratch when the Bible gives no authority to anyone for this position? It seems to me that the only one who should be exalted to the position of New Testament Prophet is Jesus. It seems to me that all other prophets after Jesus are those who speak the truth from the word of God without adding or changing anything in the word of God. It seems to me that the word of God has all that we need.

Acts 20:26-27 "Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. "For I have not shunned to declare to you the whole counsel of God.

What are your thoughts?

 

[reddogs]

Acts 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your young men shall see visions, your old men shall dream dreams.

The Bible says very clearly that God's Spirit will be poured out on all flesh and our sons and daughters shall prophesy. So why is it that the SDA has exalted Ellen White to the level she is when the Bible says that God will pour His Spirit out on all flesh? Why is it that Ellen White has the market cornered when it comes to the SOP scratch when the Bible gives no authority to anyone for this position? It seems to me that the only one who should be exalted to the position of New Testament Prophet is Jesus. It seems to me that all other prophets after Jesus are those who speak the truth from the word of God without adding or changing anything in the word of God. It seems to me that the word of God has all that we need.

Acts 20:26-27 "Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. "For I have not shunned to declare to you the whole counsel of God.

What are your thoughts?

She should not be exalted, any questions...

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Peter repeated the passage from Joel and uses it to refer to his own time. This is consistent with the other New Testament authors who called their time the last days.

The emphasis is not to new prophets but to the Holy Spirit given to the followers of Christ. Of course the office of prophet is different from prophecy. As anyone can offer a prophecy but that does not make them a prophet. A good example is Caiphas who prophecied accurately about Jesus even while he was plotting to murder Jesus.

As Adventists we have often misapplied the verse mentioned in the opening thread post. Just as we misapply the term Spirit of Prophecy to the works of EGW. See Misuse of the Term Spirit of Prophecy

as well as The Latter Rain

 

[Loveaboveall]

Mrs. White is clear that her writings would not be needed if people would diligently study the bible. The same holds true for the NT writers. Their writings would not be needed if people would diligently study the OT writings and the Gospel accounts. (The exeception being Revelation which speaks of the future, rather than the past)

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Mrs. White is clear that her writings would not be needed if people would diligently study the bible. The same holds true for the NT writers. Their writings would not be needed if people would diligently study the OT writings and the Gospel accounts. (The exeception being Revelation which speaks of the future, rather than the past)

Why would that hold true for the old testament. Seems you are overstepping the analogy even if one was to believe that EGW's statement was true.

 

[Loveaboveall]

Why would that hold true for the old testament. Seems you are overstepping the analogy even if one was to believe that EGW's statement was true.

Think about it for a second... Every precept the apostles held to was found in the OT and what Jesus taught them. They did not teach any "New" doctrine. It is all their in the OT and in the gospels if one is willing to study to find it and allow the Holy Spirit to teach him.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Think about it for a second... Every precept the apostles held to was found in the OT and what Jesus taught them. They did not teach any "New" doctrine. It is all their in the OT and in the gospels if one is willing to study to find it and allow the Holy Spirit to teach him.

No that is merely a gratuitous assertion. The basic premise that was Christianity was Jesus Christ is God something that the Old Testament did not teach that is why the Jewish leaders rejected Jesus. The New testament writers connected Christ to Old Testament concepts such as the book of Matthew using the word Immanuel, and applying it to Jesus Christ as God with us, or the similar way the book of John begins with the Word was God and the Word dwelt among us in flesh. These were radically different concepts then presented in the Old Testament.

In fact the Apostles with their new understanding of God through Christ no longer held to several Old Testament ideas. Paul calls circumcision mutilation and the council in Jerusalem only asked the Christians to hold to a few of the Old Testament commands saying:
(Acts 15:19 NIV) "It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God.(Acts 15:20 NIV) Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.

 

[Loveaboveall]

Ya'll make some good points... but...

If the Jewish leaders had been studying the OT scripture with the guidance of the Holy Spirit would they have rejected Jesus? Without the gospel accounts the OT could not be understood properly, but when you compare the OT with Jesus our eyes are opened!

Annie you make some interesting points, too... but...

Are you saying that we have no need to understand the jewish economy and what the "intricacies" of their worship entailed and meant?

It is not that we should be smart enough for none of us are smart enough. But, if we are willing to let the Holy Spirit teach us, then it should be enough.

If you study the intricacies of the priesthood you would realize it is very similar to the roles of elders and deacons of today! There is even explicit command regarding who the priests could marry/not marry

Regarding slave and master: I believe Jesus spoke on this very topic!

You must have not read that I would include the gospel accounts which speak of all these things.

 

[woobadooba]

...

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

loveaboveall wrote

If the Jewish leaders had been studying the OT scripture with the guidance of the Holy Spirit would they have rejected Jesus? Without the gospel accounts the OT could not be understood properly, but when you compare the OT with Jesus our eyes are opened!

Irrelevant, even if no one had any OT and was guided by the Holy Spirit they would have accepted Jesus, like the Centurian etc. All you are really doing is reading New Testament concepts into the Old Testament and saying they should have seen them. It is a perspective that they did not have and a perspective that you can't have because you have the knowlege of the New Testament concepts.

 

[djconklin]

No that is merely a gratuitous assertion.

And quite in line with: "The Old Testament was the gospel concealed and the New Testament is the gospel revealed."

"The religion of the Old Testament is the gospel in the bud; the New Testament is the gospel in full flower.
The Old Testament is the gospel in the blade; The New Testament is the gospel in full ear." J. C. Rylie http://doctrinesofgrace.net/modules/news/makepdf.php?storyid=66

 

[Jon0388g]

No that is merely a gratuitous assertion. The basic premise that was Christianity was Jesus Christ is God something that the Old Testament did not teach that is why the Jewish leaders rejected Jesus. The New testament writers connected Christ to Old Testament concepts such as the book of Matthew using the word Immanuel, and applying it to Jesus Christ as God with us, or the similar way the book of John begins with the Word was God and the Word dwelt among us in flesh. These were radically different concepts then presented in the Old Testament.

Lol. I'm sorry, this is absolutely ridiculous.

"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me." John 5:39

"and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus." 2 Timothy 3:15

Please note both these verses refer to the Old Testament.

The Jewish leaders did not accept Christ because their hearts were hardened. The veil was still over their hearts. The wise men studied the Scriptures, and found the Messiah through the prophecies in Micah.



Jon

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Lol. I'm sorry, this is absolutely ridiculous.

"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me." John 5:39

"and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus." 2 Timothy 3:15

Please note both these verses refer to the Old Testament.

The Jewish leaders did not accept Christ because their hearts were hardened. The veil was still over their hearts. The wise men studied the Scriptures, and found the Messiah through the prophecies in Micah.



Jon

I know it is incredibly ridiculus so many people who quote the Bible yet can't understand at all what the quotes mean. The first one is Jesus speaking about Himself as God, the scriptures very much testify about God, yet even then it is not all or only about God. Likewise the verse in Timothy is about gaining wisdom to accept Christ through the Old Testament writings. Again that says nothing about all the writing being about Jesus. And certainly none of those texts indicate that the same things found in the New Testament come from the Old Testament.

Oh and it is funny also how someone can say that the wise men knew about the messiah from Micah when they said they:
Matt 2:2 and asked, "Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star in the east and have come to worship him." (NIV)

They did not come saying we know about the Messiah from our knowledge of the sacred writings, yet somehow tradition has made that the case for some people.

The Old testament reveals the history of God and man a good deal about both yet it is not all about God or all about man. Jesus Christ is God revealed as man, that is tremendously different from the Old Testament revelations of either God or man. Until people can look at the Bible honestly no longer taking texts out of context and reading ideas into the texts we will not even see the information God has provided us. And that is not so funny.

 

[Windmill]

Mrs. White is clear that her writings would not be needed if people would diligently study the bible. The same holds true for the NT writers. Their writings would not be needed if people would diligently study the OT writings and the Gospel accounts. (The exeception being Revelation which speaks of the future, rather than the past)

Well, actually, I don't think thats quite true. There are things brought up in the other books outside Revelation that Jesus didn't speak about at all. Take for instance this passage;

[bible]1 Corinthians 7:12[/bible]

I, not the Lord. That means Jesus never spoke about it but Paul feels inspired to say that this is right. There are others, such as the place of women in the church;

[bible]1 Timothy 2:8-15[/bible]

Again, he speaks about what he feels is right here, not what Jesus said, as Jesus didn't speak on the issue, at least the Gospels don't tell us he did.

EGW's writings, though... I have a little trouble accepting. I am only now starting to question them. My main reason is for the very verse I quoted above: women are NOT meant to have spiritual authority over men and "teach" them... yet EGW did this. She certainly did not keep silent in church at all, and praised women bible workers who did NOT just go out there and teach women and children.

I find her writings make a lot of sense, though, some of it anyway. But I was reading through messages to young people, and, like... she mentioned that marrying someone when you don't love them is a sin. Uhm, what?!

Royalty have done this for yonks. People in the bible did this for yonks. They marry out of responsibility, not because they love someone. So what, are pre-arranged marriages a sin? Were they a sin in biblical times or just now or what? (No, I did NOT find this on an anti-EGW site either, I stay clear of those, full of propaganda) so I dunno, I'm wary for now.

 

[Jon0388g]

I know it is incredibly ridiculus so many people who quote the Bible yet can't understand at all what the quotes mean. The first one is Jesus speaking about Himself as God, the scriptures very much testify about God, yet even then it is not all or only about God. Likewise the verse in Timothy is about gaining wisdom to accept Christ through the Old Testament writings. Again that says nothing about all the writing being about Jesus. And certainly none of those texts indicate that the same things found in the New Testament come from the Old Testament.

It's ironic that you take yourself so seriously, yet most of your posts tickle my funny bone.

Of course, you know what the Bible quotes mean, right?

You said: "The basic premise that was Christianity was Jesus Christ is God something that the Old Testament did not teach that is why the Jewish leaders rejected Jesus."

Christ Himself said the Scriptures testify about Him. No amount of dancing will disprove that you are wrong, believe it or not.

2 Timothy states that the Scriptures lead us to the salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. Only God can save us. Jesus Christ is God Himself. You are wrong.

Please show me where I said the whole of the OT is about Jesus? Thought not.

Oh and it is funny also how someone can say that the wise men knew about the messiah from Micah when they said they:
Matt 2:2 and asked, "Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star in the east and have come to worship him." (NIV)

Lol. RC, I expected better from you. Read a couple of verses down....

"They said to him, "In Bethlehem of Judea, for this is what has been written by the prophet:

'And you, Bethlehem, Land of Judah, are by no means least among the leaders of Judah; for out of you shall come forth a Ruler who will shepherd My people Israel.' " Matthew 2:5-6

Quick trivia question: which prophet and book of the OT are they quoting? Hmm.....

They did not come saying we know about the Messiah from our knowledge of the sacred writings, yet somehow tradition has made that the case for some people.

See above.

The Old testament reveals the history of God and man a good deal about both yet it is not all about God or all about man. Jesus Christ is God revealed as man, that is tremendously different from the Old Testament revelations of either God or man. Until people can look at the Bible honestly no longer taking texts out of context and reading ideas into the texts we will not even see the information God has provided us. And that is not so funny.

Ok then.



Jon

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Lol. RC, I expected better from you. Read a couple of verses down....

"They said to him, "In Bethlehem of Judea, for this is what has been written by the prophet:

'And you, Bethlehem, Land of Judah, are by no means least among the leaders of Judah; for out of you shall come forth a Ruler who will shepherd My people Israel.' " Matthew 2:5-6

Quick trivia question: which prophet and book of the OT are they quoting? Hmm.....


See above.

Ok then.

Jon

Who said the above the wise men or the people Herod asked:

(Mat 2:3 NIV) When King Herod heard this he was disturbed, and all Jerusalem with him.

(Mat 2:4 NIV) When he had called together all the people's chief priests and teachers of the law, he asked them where the Christ was to be born.

(Mat 2:5 NIV) "In Bethlehem in Judea," they replied, "for this is what the prophet has written:

(Mat 2:6 NIV) "'But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for out of you will come a ruler who will be the shepherd of my people Israel.'"

(Mat 2:7 NIV) Then Herod called the Magi secretly and found out from them the exact time the star had appeared.

(Mat 2:8 NIV) He sent them to Bethlehem and said, "Go and make a careful search for the child. As soon as you find him, report to me, so that I too may go and worship him."

(Mat 2:9 NIV) After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen in the east went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was.

Notice that was not the wise men who you said what is quoted in Matt 2:6, if that had been the case then there would have been no need to correct your statement where you said: "The wise men studied the Scriptures, and found the Messiah through the prophecies in Micah."

You can try to belittle me all you want and it seems that there are certain folks here who can only do that, but it does not change the facts.

 

[djconklin]

My main reason is for the very verse I quoted above: women are NOT meant to have spiritual authority over men and "teach" them... yet EGW did this. She certainly did not keep silent in church at all, and praised women bible workers who did NOT just go out there and teach women and children.

The difference is that she was called by God; just like Philip's four daughters.

Acts 21:9​

And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy.​

 

[djconklin]

Notice that was not the wise men who you said what is quoted in Matt 2:6

Correction of fact: he didn't say that the wise men said it.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Correction of fact: he didn't say that the wise men said it.

No correction needed I put the quote of what Jon said, "The wise men studied the Scriptures, and found the Messiah through the prophecies in Micah."

Your help is not needed and it seems at least in this case not even correct.

 

[maco]

Hello to everyone,

I just got back from camp meeting and it was a blessed time.

This is the problem I have with how the SDA views Ellen White. Ellen has said many good things that came from her own thoughts and can be a blessing to those who read them. But she has also said many things that did not originate from her own thoughts. Both of her sources are used by the SDA to validate her position as the NT prophet. She has also made quite a few wrong prophesies. She also says things that are not found in the Bible. If I were to present to the SDA church Charles Taze Russell they would say he is a false prophet based on the same errors that Ellen White had.

I have no problem with Ellen White being labeled a Christian writer just like all other Christian writers. But to exalt her to the status of NT prophet is a liablity to the SDA church.

The Bible says that God, in the last days, will pour out His Spirit on all flesh. In other words, anyone who come to Christ with a repented heart can come alive unto God through Christ, this this new birth. With this new birth one can understand and disern spiritual matters, as well as, understand the Bible for him/herself if they take the time to study for themselves.

Romans 6:11 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Hebrews 8:10-11 "For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel: After those days,'' says the Lord, "I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. "None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, `Know the Lord,' for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them.

Many blessings,
John