christian study

Jon Paulien has blogged a bit about the event:
Conference on Ellen White

They are planning to make an “authoratative” book on her life. Why they held part of the meetings on the Sabbath hours, i don’t know, but hope that they end result is good. I did learn one thing from it already: “Jon Paulien note: Calvin Stowe was the source of Ellen White’s wording on biblical hermeneutics in Selected Messages, vol. 1: “It is not the words of the Bible that were inspired, but the men that were inspired.”). ”

Here is the chapter in their book, sent to me by email:

The Sealing
By Colin and Russell Standish

One of the most dramatic and significant events in the history of this sin-cursed earth is the sealing of God’s end-time saints. It is the culmination of Christ’s high-priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. It includes the vindication of God’s people, the conclusion of the investigative judgment, the completion of the atonement and the blotting out of the forgiven sins of God’s remnant. It settles the eternal destiny of the very elect. None who are sealed will be “unsealed.” They have proven to the all-wise God of the universe that their loyalty to Him has no reservations. Quintillions of years will not erode their loyalty to Christ. The fiercest persecution, the most pressing temptations, the craftiest deceptions cannot seduce them away from the blood-stained banner of Jesus Christ. However, before we proceed further, we need to clarify that the Bible reveals two sealings. It is essential that this distinction be clearly delineated. First, when we are fully converted we are sealed. Paul wrote:

And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. (Ephesians 4:30)

Plainly, this is not the final sealing, for Paul would not need to warn these individuals against later grieving the Holy Spirit, subsequent to this preliminary sealing.

Further, this sealing certainly is not the end-time sealing, for it would force us into the false Augustinian doctrine of “once saved, always saved.” That belief is not sustained by Scripture. Here are two examples of this sealing.

Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts. (2 Corinthians 1:21–22)

In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise. (Ephesians 1:13)
…

the sealing is future according to colin and russell standishRead More »

So i contacted this group, and received a email with 5 newsletters attached. Mostly what was written was good, but a few clear “supposition” things (like how 666 refers to the number of people Satan leaves alive in each of his cell groups at the end time!?!) were written too. However, their view that Ellen White is not a prophet of God is absolutely wrong.

The reason for this post is to warn anyone who has any contact with RST Seminars (Revelation Speaks Today), and its owner, Sandi Evilisizer Kosak, to not have anything to do with them.

Sandi wrote me: “The problem is that in order to keep their financial positions within the church, they are teaching the false idea that there are “dual” fullfilments. That they happened in the past one way as symbolic, and that they will happen in the future as literal. This cant be farther from the truth. A seal can only open once and trumpet number 1 can only sound once.

As people come into this understanding, if they abandon the historical view completely, they are disbarred from the church. It is because of SOP, in holding up EGW above the Bible. The ones who hold the historical view cannot abandon it without admitting EGW was infallible. Because she says the seals and trumpets were in the past, they cannot change the church doctrinal position on the prophecies. If she were alive today, she would be changing her position based on new light that she consistently spoke of.”

When i wrote her explaining that i had found some good material in the 5 newsletters, and a couple of strange things, and to believe in Ellen White as God’s prophet she wrote: “All of the prophets in the Bible have been wrong.”

Well, now we see that there is no common ground at all, so i sent a email asking to her repent, and she wrote back: “The only things written by your “prophet” (I say this because I am not an SDA), ” and “Please do not contact me again.”

This is exactly the worst thing that i have thot of happening to this new light in the prophecies, is that some disgusting group will promote it, to turn away honest souls from seeking the truth. Please avoid RST Seminars until they repent and believe God’s prophets,

Name: ep Date: Oct 3, 2006

listen to jeff pippenger sermons online at http://www.theseventhunders.com/gallery/

Name: webmaster Date: Oct 4, 2006

I met Br. Jeff Pippenger in Holland and Germany. He has a few interesting discoveries in the prophecies leading up to 1844. Mostly tho, you can just read Uriah Smith’s book and get most of the same information.

When shown from Ellen White’s second vision that right after the sealing was completed the 7 Last Plagues were poured out, he said i was misapplying that. Sorry to say, it seems that when an inspired writing cuts across his theories, he doesn’t like it too much….

Name: mark Date: Nov 3, 2006

I don’t see any “sermons online” at this site.

Name: Anonymous Date: Oct 3, 2008

I know jeff pretty well, and he supports the biblical view that the 4 angels are going to hold the four winds of strife while probationary time is open for humanity. And that once the close of probation arrives, then and not before the seven plagues are poured out because the 4 angels do not hold the winds from this point on any longer. That´s number one.

And number two, it is also false what you say that Jeff is pretty much saying what Uriath Smith wrote in that book. I wonder why, if you don´t know, you speak as if you knew, and people may get a wrong idea about this good man. He is very logic, very inteligent, with a lot of common sense, and coutious about his conclusions. Jeff has been blessed by God with loads of new light, prophetic truths that concerns us in this present time. But at the same time he defends the forgotten prophetic truths in the Seventh-day adventism, the ones the pioneers held. And building upon that firm platform he advanced in new prophetic light. For example Daniel 11:40-45. The role of Islam in Bible prophecy with the Third woe, the seven churches, the seven thunders, the sealing time, revelation 17,18. Etc…. A lot of people are studying these truths, and are seeing a great blessing, this is the final message for adventism and the world.

Name: Anonymous 2 Date: April 24th

ITS interessting concerning EGW saying about the latter rain starting to fall that no one will say “I belong to Paul”, and “I belong to Kaifas” etc. The very people who endorse Pippenger clearly states we are depended on “his ideas” for salvation.
This doens’t fit with the quote I read.
When people are united the sprinkling will start, when people manifest the love of Christ. Not unified by fear but by love.

Name: Anonymous Date: April 24th

I agree.. when clear statements from egw doesn’t fit with the theory we are claimed to misread those quotes, but when they use unclear quotes to fit with the theory then they are reading them correctly. This isn’t fair.

Name: webmaster Date: April 25th

Anonymous of October 3, 2008 wrote: “And number two, it is also false what you say that Jeff is pretty much saying what Uriath Smith wrote in that book. I wonder why, if you don´t know, you speak as if you knew, and people may get a wrong idea about this good man.”

Sir, as i wrote in October 4, 2006 posting, i met the man in both Holland and Germany in summer 2006. I listened to several of his sermons. Basically he says the 7 trumpets are in the past. When i showed him the inspired word that the sealing of the 144,000 must be in the future, he got riled at me, and said i was taking it out of context. The problem is, IF the sealing of the 144,000 is future to where we are today, then the 5th trumpet CANNOT HAVE POSSIBLY SOUNDED YET.

My blood brother and i just spent over an hour studying Ezekiel 9 along with the Revelation 7, 8 and 9. It is clear that the trumpets happen AFTER the 144,000 are sealed in their foreheads.

Name: webmaster Date: May 7th

Anonymous of October 3 wrote “The role of Islam in Bible prophecy with the Third woe”. How can this be, when the first and second “woes” have not even occurred yet????

Stephen Dickie is promoting the idea that the Muslims were the first “woe” which cannot be right either. Why is it that us SDAs are trying to fit Islam into any of the “woes”?

Name: Sister in Christ Date: May 9th

Because Islam is a hot topic.

“And now, little children, abide in him, that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence and not be ashamed before him at his coming.” 1 John 2:28
…

jeff pippenger’s false prophecy interpretationsRead More »

Matthew 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)
16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

I’m really afraid that we Seventh-day Adventists have not been progressing at all in our understanding of prophecy. Yes, William Miller was led of God, but remember, he had to have everything finished by 1843! This too was of God, to get the people to turn to their Bibles and study deeply, like their lives depended on it – which it did. And i posit, that it does for us today too, yet just about all we hear and study, is that basically everything is already over except for the Sunday Law, Loud Cry, Time of Trouble, Close of Probation, Time of Jacob’s Trouble, and the Second Coming.

I humbly urge that we take our self-satisfied blinders off, and re-read the Bible for what it says.

In Daniel 12, is the Abomination of Desolation before or after the 1290 days? This is so obvious, why has most everyone overlooked this, or explained it away from its obvious meaning? Now the important dates in SDA prophetic history are usually said to be 457BC, 31AD, 34, 508, 538, 1798, and 1843(4). The only 1290 year period here is the one from 508 to 1798. But as far as i know, no one is teaching that the Abomination of Desolation was erected in 1798. It defies common sense. One other major setback for the theory that the AOD is in the past, is that after the AOD is set up, those who come to the 1335 are blessed – but the only 1335 according to these dates would be 508 – 1843. Now there is no BC/AD one year miss here, as both of these dates are AD. Who was “blessed” in 1843? Let’s be honest with ourselves – no one.

We have seen just from a very short look at Daniel, that the AOD must be in the future, but what about looking at Matthew 24? Isn’t Jesus talking about the end of the world? Almost every SDA i’ve ever talked to will agree that it is. Then please read Matthew 24 verse by verse. What happens? – many false Christs arise. Has that occurred yet? A little bit perhaps, but not “many”. Then, verse 14 says that the gospel shall be preached in all the world, and THEN shall the end come. Has that happened yet? Almost, but not yet. Then what is the next verse – 15? Beware this Abomination of Desolation! It did NOT happen in 1798. In fact, it has never happened.

I studied this with my Brother in Zurich last week, and he was amazed, and gave this text as another showing what is involved with the AOD:
2Thessalonians 2:3 Let no one deceive you* by any means, because [that Day will not come] unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of destruction [or, the one destined to be lost],
4 the one being in opposition [or, being hostile] and puffing himself up with pride over every [thing] being called god or [every] object of worship, with the result that he sits down in the sanctuary of God as God, displaying himself that he is God.

Who else can this be, except Satan himself? He will appear as god, and will deceive the whole world, except for the elect. The time he is allowed to work, looks to be 1,260 days. Doesn’t that fit in with the same time frame in Revelation 11 & 12? And isn’t the 3 1/2 years of Elijah’s ministry, and even Jesus’ period of working — doesn’t that have a direct bearing for the 144,000? How can these times be exactly the same, and then mentioned exactly again in Revelation, and we throw them away in the “historical fulfilment” trash heap?

In talking about the Jews:

Their sufferings are often represented as a punishment visited upon them by the direct decree of God.
………….
God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression; but he leaves the rejecters of his mercy to themselves, to reap that which they have sown.
…………..
In the presence of the assembled inhabitants of earth and Heaven takes place the final coronation of the Son of God. And now, invested with supreme majesty and power, the King of kings pronounces sentence upon the rebels against his government, and executes justice upon those who have transgressed his law and oppressed his people.

=======================
This is one of the biggest contradictions i can find in material with Ellen White’s name on the cover, after her husband’s death in 1881. The only bigger one i can think of are the quotes that the words in the Bible are inspired, then the one quote in Selected Messages that they are not inspired.

Does anyone have any input on this contradiction?

Is this significant, or semantics? Well, i do believe that it could have a great impact on your salvation, so i’ve made up a little study of the subject here.

With the true interpretation given by the Holy Spirit, let’s see what the nature of man and Christ is.

First, let’s define the general positions taken by us Adventists:
1. Jesus and us have the exact same nature.
2. Jesus had sinless nature, and we have sinful nature.

Position one is generally taken by “conservatives”, and position two by “liberals”. As i’ve mentioned elsewhere on this blog, liberals have no foundation, so i identify much more strongly with the “conservatives”, but with differences of opinion on around 4 subjects, including this one.

Let’s look at postion one. There are two possibilities for this to be true – either both had perfect natures, or both sinful natures. Now i’ve heard “conservatives” who have supported both of these possibilities. The possibility supported by my Brother i met last weekend was that “no one is born sinful, as that is the Catholic doctrine of Original Sin.” Others who support the second possibility say that Christ is just like you and me in every detail.

For the first possibility to be true, it would mean two things: 1. If you are not born sinful, then it is within the realm of possibility for anyone who keeps the law perfectly to go to heaven without needing Jesus Christ as their Saviour. This is impossible.

For the second possibility to be true, it would mean nearly the same thing, but from the opposite point of view, that Jesus himself would have needed a Saviour.

So we see even before we show the inspired quotes, that the “conservative” SDA view of the nature of Christ is very flawed. Both possibilities of this view boil down to the idea that it is possible to get to heaven by works.

The “liberal” viewpoint on this issue is much more correct, but even with the correct premise, they come to a false conclusion. Yes, Jesus came as a perfectly-untainted-by-sin human. He took on himself the results of around 4,000 years of physical degeneration, but did not come with a heart with a bent to sin like we do. This is why it can be truly said that he is the “second Adam”. He sure wasn’t close to Adam physically, so for this inspired phrase to have any meaning at all, it must mean morally. And this is what the inspired word attests of.

But this view doesn’t mean that Jesus was “super”, so he could live a sinless life, but we can’t. This conclusion is taught by many in the church who say that “we will be sinning until Jesus comes in the clouds”. No, no. We can, and must overcome sin right here and right now, in the same way that Jesus overcame – by complete submission to the will of his Father.

We all know that Jesus’ birth was miraculous. But in contemplating it, it shows that he was not exactly like us humans today, in that his physical father was heavenly. He was made in the likeness of mankind tho, so the Creator did become like the created.

Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

Heb 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
…

nature of christRead More »

Both of the professors have doctorates, i think from Andrews University, the flagship seminary of Seventh-day Adventists. One of them was Dr. Kai, and the other Dr. Fanwar. My only prior exposure to these two men is that one time i listened in a Sabbath school to Dr. Kai’s good lesson, and one sermon at RAIS by Dr. Fanwar in which he said that “We have been told that David was a small boy when he fought Goliath, that he used a little sling, and that he won because of his faith in God. Nothing could be farther from the truth.” I asked him to repent when i left that meeting place.

The introduction by the pastor during church service in the morning was quite “pro unconditional love”, so i was expecting a multitude of words about how this doctrine is true and good, and the PhDs to add some scholarly remarks. Maybe i should say i was “hoping”.

Br. Kai led off with remarks that the SDA church has no official position on this matter. Then he mentioned that it is probably OK for each person to consider themselves as the most loved of God, but it can become a problem if we start to think we are more loved or favored of God than other people. All very well and good.

Br. Fanwar talked next about marrying and having a daughter. He unwittingly made the strongest remark i heard all day about how love is not unconditional. He mentioned how when he saw his newborn daughter, he knew that here was someone he loved so much he could give his life for, and also he would kill anyone who tried to kill her. It seemed to go completely over his head, and over most of the listeners’, that he had just given a strong statement that he doesn’t believe in unconditional love. Of course with his mouth he was quite adamant that he DOES believe in unconditional love.

Pastor Songrit, who called the seminar together, next got up and thanked them, asked for questions from the audience, and after one question, asked his own question, which was quite appropriate. He read Psalms 5:5-6 about how God hates the workers of iniquity. Wow. That is not dodging the issue at all. Br. Kai gave a comment mostly how some things in the Bible are hard to understand. Br. Fanwar gave a convoluted response, asserting that the translation was at fault, and that this text does not negate the idea of unconditional love.

I’m not sure if i was next to get up, or two later, but after one elder who asked a very strange question about how to tell if people really love their country or not, i got the courage to go up front. I agreed that God’s love is very big, and that the Bible talks much more about the love of God than his wrath, but i wanted to introduce some texts that show that God’s love is not unconditional. We read 2Chronicles 19:1,2, Hosea 9:15, John 14:21-23, and then i read a quote from 5RH 06-22-97 about Judas passing the barrier of God’s love. I thank the Lord that i was able to overcome the butterflies in my stomach, and give a straight testimony.

Br. Kai answered first, saying how he had once gone thru the Concordance and counted all the entries related to God’s wrath, and then those related to God’s love, and found that the “wrath” ones were around 100, and the “love” ones were around 80. Then he noticed that the “wrath” ones were usually against some specific object, and the “love” ones were universal in scope.

Br. Fanwar then got up and read something from the Testimonies to the Church, about how God’s love is like the air we breathe, abiding around us. “God’s wrath is his love as experienced by the lost.” What?! I thot God’s wrath was fire at the end time, and has been floods, hail, fire, stones, angels etc. in the past. He tried to make some connection between the air around us is unconditional so God’s love is too, and he can’t believe God would not do something good for the 97% of his fellow Asians who do not know him, etc. Totally unrelated. He closed with something about how God’s love is unconditional, but that doesn’t mean that he looks on the actions all the same. Of course this is to try and cover any questions about him believing that God will save everyone at last. But in this seminar, no one asked such a question.

The pastor ended the seminar with a nice statement about everyone learning things, and that perhaps more time could be devoted to this subject in the future. Then he said that he still believed in unconditional love.

Does it really matter what we believe? Is it really OK for some of God’s people to believe in unconditional love and some not to? I don’t think so. I see the ultimate end of believing this doctrine, and that is that all will at last be saved. Because how can God possibly burn anyone in the lake of fire, and keep other out of the lake of fire, if his love is actually unconditional? How can he love you or i or even his son Jesus any more than Satan himself, because, after all, “unconditional” naturally means that God would have to love everyone exactly equally.

What struck me most about this seminar, is the shallowness of the thinking of most of our church leaders and members. No one dug down to the meaning of the term, or the natural consequences of believing such a doctrine. And when strong texts were quoted showing that God’s love is not unconditional, they were mostly ignored, or assigned the status of “misunderstood”