posted
"Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled." Matthew 5:6.
Not by painful struggles or wearisome toil, not by gift or sacrifice, is righteousness obtained; but it is freely given to every soul who hungers and thirsts to receive it. "Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat, . . . without money and without price." "Their righteousness is of Me, saith the Lord," and, "This is His name whereby He shall be called, The Lord Our Righteousness." Isaiah 55:1; 54:17; Jeremiah 23:6.
No human agent can supply that which will satisfy the hunger and thirst of the soul. But Jesus says, "Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear My voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with Me." "I am the bread of life: he that cometh to Me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on Me shall never thirst." Revelation 3:20; John 6:35.
Righteousness is holiness, likeness to God, and "God is love." 1 John 4:16. It is conformity to the law of God, for "all Thy commandments are righteousness" (Psalm 119:172), and "love is the fulfilling of the law" (Romans 13:10). Righteousness is love, and love is the light and the life of God. The righteousness of God is embodied in Christ. We receive righteousness by receiving Him.
--From a little book called, "Thoughts From The Mount of Blessings"
As it was written...Righteousness is holiness, likeness to God, and "God is love." 1 John 4:16. It is conformity to the law of God, for "all Thy commandments are righteousness" (Psalm 119:172), and "love is the fulfilling of the law" (Romans 13:10). Righteousness is love, and love is the light and the life of God. The righteousness of God is embodied in Christ. We receive righteousness by receiving Him.
--From a little book called, "Thoughts From The Mount of Blessings"
(See http://www.whiteestate.org/books/mb/mb2.html ) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well there are a few innacuracies here, methinks. First of all, righteousness is not holiness. GOD'S righteousness is holiness. Job was a righteous man yet he was not holy until possibly after his face to face encounter with the Lord. The 2nd last sentence is right on. But the last sentence again is off. We receive GOD'S righteousness by receiving Christ and not just generic righteousness. Receiving Christ is in holiness and God's type of righteousness. It is a wonder to me how many expositors of the word can't see that righteousness can be in innocense apart from God's universe-shaking power. We are, after all created in His image. Just a few thoughts
I challenged you to read only the word, and no other commentary on it for 6 mos to a year. Obviously you have not taken me up on that challenge. Learning from others certainly has it's place (that is why I come to the RCC), but when we rely too heavily on it (especially when it is coming from only one person or organization) we are satisfying ourselves with chewing on someone elses cud rather than eating our meals ourselves (something millions of American christians do each week), and we set ourselves up for scriptural error.
I hope that you remain open to discuss the issue of righteousness.
First, the Bible is the last place you would want to turn to disprove righteousness among men. If none are righteous then how can Jesus call Abel "rigtheous Abel" Mat. 23:35 Of course the weight of evidence easily indicates that there are and always has been righteous ones in the Earth. Noah was righteous Gen 6:9 etc etc... If you did a study on the righteous and righteousness in general you would change your position in very short order. There is something very wrong with a doctrine that denies the existence of the righteous. I realize that modern Christians have been lured away from sound doctrine, and this is a classic example of that.
The first verse you cited has it's roots in Eccl.7:20 (ki adam eyn tsadik..) The context of Romans 3 can be summed up in verse 23. We have all fallen short of the glory of God. Our righteousness is unsufficient before the Lord. No one only does good and never sins. This in no way disproves the existence of the righteous. Here we are comparing to God. No one is good compared with God. Only He is good. We could add that none are Christian as well. Only Christ is totally obedient etc etc... Could we then deny the existance of saints as well?
I have strength and God has strength. Compared with God My strength is insignificant, yet I can help my wife carry groceries. You can't disprove that I can carry groceries simply because God is so much stronger than I. You may have even carried groceries yourself!
The Bible also says that without Christ I can do nothing. (John 15:5)Did Christ help me get dressed this morning? Did He choose jeans over trousers?
The second verse you cited states that God is righteous and that everyone that does (His) righteousness is born of Him. Here we are talking about God's righteousness, not our own. One cannot be righteous in this way without a new birth in the Spirit. This is basic NT doctrine.
Read Ez. 18:20-32 and the laws of righteousness. I'd like your comments on that. Also Matt. 25 (sheep and goats judgment)
How are you able to read the Psalms without censoring much of what is read. For example "The Lord rewarded me according to my righteousness; according to the cleanness of my hands hath He recompensed me." Ps 18:20 and 24 etc....
Even in the NT Zacharias and Elisabeth are declared righteous "And they were both righteous before God..." Luke 1:6
I hope you will reconsider your view in order to see that there are 2 types of righteousness, ours and God's. We who believe now seek the kingdom of God and His righteousness. But alas, Romans 3:11 says that none of us seek Was Jesus just teasing us with "seek and you shall find" knowing that none will actually ever seek? Or do we need a better understanding of what Paul is actually saying. Oops! Romans 3:11 also says that none understandeth. If that's so then we shouldn't listen to Paul either since he can't possibly have any understanding. Oh no, a conundrum!
quote: We have all fallen short of the glory of God. Our righteousness is unsufficient before the Lord. No one only does good and never sins.
John, elsewhere you quoted Paul when he said, "Not I, but Christ liveth in me." Are you saying that even when Christ lives in a person's heart they will continue to sin? Are you saying now that even Christ cannot keep us from sin? What happens to the POWER you spoke of. What happened to "I can do all things through Christ?" "Is Christ the minister of sin?
And, Yes, there have been people whom God considered righteous. They lived righteous lives just as every other truly righteous person has ever lived. "The just shall live by faith." Men may have self-righteousness but true righteousness comes only from God. (Righteousness being "doing right" or "doing justly.") The reason our righteousness comes short of God's glory is that in God's eyes all our righteousness is filthy rags.
Or, have you changed your mind and now believe that some will be justified in the sight of God by keeping the law? No, no, no! We are totally dependent upon Christ for any righteousness we may posses. It is not ours, but His! We are NEVER righteous unless it is the righteousness of Christ. Brother, are you falling into a salvation by works mindset? Don't you know that unless Christ is in you, you would be total worthless morally? (See 2Cor 13:5).
Give me a hint regarding Ez 18 and Matt 25. I consider them to support my position. How do you view them?
In my view you are mixing the way of righteousness and the way of holiness into the same category. This is a common mistake. The other common mistake is to forego righteousness completely and only preach grace without any personal responsibility. No judgment possible for the believer. You would never do that in my view. You have, however, synthesized 2 ways into 1. When Ez 18 was written, grace in Christ didn't exist. Otherwise how could it be a new a living way? How could you agree with both EZ 18 and grace without batting an eye?
Both Ez 18 and Matt. 25 speak of people being judged according to their own works APART from Christ. If you do bad, you die, if you do good, you live. No other power than your own instincts and actions. There is no reward for these, just to live. Like in the parable of the pennies. All the righteous receive the same reward. This is different from the saints who receive many different levels of reward.
As I have mentioned before, the parable of the talents relates to saints. These are people who have received Christ's anointing. What God is looking for in these is the new nature and the fruit thereof. There is a whole world of difference between a person who is good-natured and one who walks in Christ's resurrection power, don't you think?
The Torah supports the gospel, but the Torah is not the gospel. We are talking about apples and oranges here. Notice that they are both fruit!
I am very strong on grace and the power of the Spirit. That is by faith in Christ in holiness. However, I see a more basic messsage in the Bible. That is a message as unto little children to do what is right. The righteous have little or no spiritual understanding. They are scarcely saved as the Bible says. They are forever like little children. They will not rule and reign with Christ, but rather be ruled by the saints.
Spiritual understanding is the knowledge of the holy. I must ask you if you have seen Christ? Have you tasted His holiness? Have you been to the throne room of grace by the Spirit? I ask these things in all sincerity, since they will determine very much your point of view.
If the answer is no, that's okay. It would explain how both ways got mixed in together in your doctrine. If yes, then try to consider what others experience who do not know this grace. Christians have a higher calling than others. I hope I'm not messing this up! I think I'll stop here.
I am just now getting back to this. Did you find error in what I quoted as John believes he has? John says there are at least two ways: the way of holiness and the way of righteousness. Is that your position as well?
Re-read what I wrote early in this thread. I have had many good friends who could express the gospel correctly in words, and yet, I know their understanding of the words were off in some way. You can go to the mormon temple and hear the right words... at first.
You quoted some statistics one time about how those in the SDA curch felt closer to God and read their Bibles more when they read Ellen Whites writting regularly. This scarred me!!! You realize any good Mormon would tell you the same about the writings of John Smith?
My challenge to you still stands, and I do pray you will take me up on it- even if for no other reason than to prove me wrong.
I do post this out of genuine care for you- and with humility- as, being human, am prone to error as well (scripture, however is not, and limiting yourself to only it's exposure could certainly do no harm).
Thank you for your concern. But in order to comply I would need to forgo more than just extra-biblical reading. I also read a lot in this cafe.
Jeanne, I have studied the teachings of the SDA church for some 10 years now and in every case I find that it agrees completely with scripture. I have not found one person who has been able to refute these teachings with solid Biblical evidence. I believe that the true test of truth is that it can stand extreme criticism and not be nicked even slightly. This is the case with the teachings of the Adventist church. This is not the case with most of what I hear in most Christian circles.
Biblical truth must be supported by the weight of evidence in scripture. For example, if you find two or three verses which oppose five or six verses what are you to do? Do you accept the interpretation that is most agreeable to you or do you go with the majority of evidence? I am sorry to say that in some cases people have adopted interpretations that side with the lesser evidence.
In the forum of recent we have been talking about the law and whether it was abolished. No one has yet claimed it has been abolished. I was glad to see this because the common belief today is that it has been abolished. We all agree that we are not under the law and that it no longer condemns us if we are in Christ and walking after the spirit [of Christ]. And, we agree that love fulfills the law. But we have not come to the final conclusion in this matter.
We are commanded to love our neighbor. If we truly love our neighbor we will look after his welfare and happiness as much as our own. A person who thus loves their neighbor fulfills the law of God in that they do not covet what he has, they do not lie to him or about him, they do not hate him, nor any of the other things the moral law condemns. This is how they fulfill the law by love.
But aside from the command that forbid certain things against our neighbor there are command that forbid things against God. If a person loves God then they will not have other gods beside him, they will not worship idols, they will not take his name in vain, etc, etc...
But then we come to two commands which are not set in a negative tone but rather a positive tone. Honor your father and mother, and Remember the Sabbath. How does love fulfill these commands? Can we just ignore them?
What I need is a practical way to reconcile this in my mind. It is not too hard to answer the one about honoring our parents for myself. That one seems pretty obvious. The difficult one is the Sabbath command. That is where I am stuck! There are so many conflicting views.
The easiest thing is to keep it simple and keep it holy as the commandment plainly states. The difficult part is that some tell you to ignore the command to keep the day holy just keep every day holy. Others say to keep one day a week holy. Others say treat every day alike. Yet others say that Jesus is now the Sabbath. But no one can bring definitive scriptural evidence (or facts, as Matthew prefers) to the table. So until I find other evidence which says, for example, that God made every day holy, then I will continue to keep the Sabbath as best I know how.
BTW, Joseph Smith founded the LDS movement and they have their own version of the Bible, unlike the SDA who study from the same Bibles as the whole of Christendom-- i.e., KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASB, AMP, CEV, etc, etc... We are not dependent upon a particular translation to uphold our teachings but find that even the paraphrased versions have an over-abundance of scriptural support for our faith even though some contain extra wording in an attempt to establish a private interpretation of scripture that suits their taste.
You are not easily offended, and I give you much credit for that! I will say one more thing about this all- mainly because you asked me by name for my opinion, and then I will shut up about it all .
In moving away from big church into home church, I have had an experience that I have heard others on this forum speak about as well. It is similar to the experience I have heard from missionaries who have gone to areas that had not yet been reached by western christianity (churchianity, really). It is the oppening up of my eyes to the fact that I see scripture through certain glasses- I interpret through what I already believe to be true. These beliefs are based on my cultural experience, as well as my particular church and denominational experience. It has been so fun to see those glasses come off- even if it is a little at a time, and to watch my own relationship with God blossom because of it.
It is my oppinion that you have on SDA colored glasses, and because of that your interpretation tends to be very rigid and one sided. My challenge to you is to accept the possibility that this might be true, and to therefore set asside as much SDA input as possible, reading the Word with a continual prayer to the Lord that He would open your eyes and show you if this is true. You of course could put aside reading from this cafe as well- however, what I like about this cafe is that the church backgrounds represented here are quite diverse- it isn't say a baptist, or lutheran website for instance, so I am not hearing the Word interpreted by just one viewpoint (other than the fact that we are all quite western in our thinking).
Anyway, I think you get what I am saying- you can do with it what you wish.
Perhaps you are unfamiliar with my conversion. I spent about 6 months reading and studying scripture before I set foot into a church (IC). I think my beliefs were pretty well formed by that time as I would pray and study almost to the exclusion of work and sleep. During this time a attended a house church. Perhaps this is when I discovered this site.
BTW, it was during this same time that my eyesight deteriated. I am sure all that late night reading in bed with poor light didn't help. But I was turning 40 as well. My eyes have gotten continually worse. With all of that I don't (can't) read with the same enjoyment because I have been unable to get a good prescription. So I don't read much extra-biblical works now anyway. I am focusing on scripture and making it my touchstone.
quote:Originally posted by JeffL: BTW, Joseph Smith founded the LDS movement and they have their own version of the Bible, unlike the SDA who study from the same Bibles as the whole of Christendom-- i.e., KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASB, AMP, CEV, etc, etc... We are not dependent upon a particular translation to uphold our teachings but find that even the paraphrased versions have an over-abundance of scriptural support for our faith even though some contain extra wording in an attempt to establish a private interpretation of scripture that suits their taste.
Now now now JeffL! This is not true and you know it! Y`all have your own version as well. It was called "The Clear Word Bible" and now is just called "The Clear Word" because it is so blatantly A SDA BIBLE! It is altered to fit the sda slant. Here is the website. http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/2102.htm Please note the last comments by a sda leader.
Not a Bible huh? Then how about this "The Andrews Study Bible" As they say;
"'The Andrews Study Bible will provide the tools necessary for any Bible reader—no matter the level of theological training—to navigate the Scriptures in a meaningful way,' he said.
Those tools will include an extensive study note and reference system, general articles on important theological and interpretive principles, maps, charts and indexes, all prepared for the general reader. Andreasen said that the heart of the Andrews Study Bible will be one of the standard English translations of the Bible commonly used by conservative evangelicals. The ultimate purpose will be to produce a work that is academically credible, theologically sound and practically useful for the individual reader, and for wide distribution in Adventist evangelism."
Fascinating. Adventist evangelism... that says it all!
Matthew
-------------------- Hope with abandon, all ye who enter here!
The Clear Word is not a translation nor is it truly a paraphrase. An Adventist pastor had made numerous notes while studying the Bible and once they became known there was a demand for them. So they produced what should clearly be called a Bible commentary-- this is not that uncommon for men to write commentary on scripture.
The Andrews Study Bible is, as they say, one of the standard English translations of the Bible. When Adventist hold evangelistic series they often produce Bibles with study notes in the back. But at the heart is a standard translation. The study notes help the user study particular topics of interest.
So, they don't really have their own personal translation of scripture as do the Mormon's, the Catholic's, and the JW's-- as I already stated correctly.
Matthew, I am not sure why you are so against the Adventist faith. Are you not aware of the words of Jesus who said, "Forbid him not, for he that is not against us is for us"? The Adventist do a great work worldwide in bringing many soles to Christ. With schools, hospitals, health institutes, disaster relief, missionaries, and on and on. They are in more countries than any other faith. And, may at this time be the fastest growing denomination baptizing thousands at a single evangelistic series. You should be rejoicing over one soul converted to Christ.
Think of it this way. If you feel that our doctrines are in error then organize yourselves and reach out to those whom we have already brought to Christ. We have done the hard work-- spent our monies, our efforts, taken the risk, put forth the effort to win them to Christ. Your work should be easy. Stop wasting time looking for the least little flaw in someone else whom you should consider your brothers and sisters in Christ and join in the effort to win souls.
Luke 12:
43 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. 44 Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath. 45 But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken; 46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
posted
Mormons use The KJV, they just add Joseph Smith's book of Mormon behind it, and qualify it as "more pure". There are no ancient documents to substantiate it at all. Their problems come from following the wrong person.
Charles Taze Russell changed The Bible for the JWs, but was convicted of purgery in court, when it was proven that he didn't even know the Greek alphabet. Their problems come from following the wrong person.
The Catholics have the Pope, and have added books that are seen as "history only" by other faiths. At least they are history! Their problems come from following the wrong person.
Ellen G. White has been proven to claim thousands of words she did not even come up with, as her very own "visions." She made ridiculous claims under the same guise. The sda churches problems come from following the wrong person.
The sda faith is not perfectly Biblical. Its foundation is Ellen G. White. It is horribly flawed, just like the other faiths you so casually mentioned that have the exact same problem.
Here are a few verses for you to think about...
"And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in My name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many."
"I marvel that ye are so soon removed from Him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert The Gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."
"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by The Word of God and prayer."
"But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we. For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light."
"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."
What the sda church preaches is a bondage that carries a great curse. What Christ preached is freedom that carries the greatest of blessings. It's just that simple.
Matthew
P.S. If the others here are interested, they can see for themselves who is correct about the sda Bibles, that's why I post my source.
-------------------- Hope with abandon, all ye who enter here!
posted
I didn't realize the Mormon's used the KJV. I know they tolerate it but I have never encountered one who carried it with them. Are you certain about this?
I read the article by John Mark Ministries and found it to be very fair. He even went so far as to include a letter from a pastor-friend giving further details and including Blanco's (the author) preface which states "This is not a new translation but an interpretative paraphrase of scripture. It is not intended for in-depth study or for public reading in churches."
Well, it looks like it would be pointless to discuss this further. I don't see that I can convince you otherwise as I have already addressed this issue elsewhere. The only thing I can say is that for your sake I hope I am wrong. But I still don't need anything but the Bible to prove my faith.
Consider this one thing. We don't use Mrs. White's writings in our evangelistic meetings to teach Adventist doctrine. How then do we get converts? It is from the Bible alone. Yes, they are all there.
Pray earnestly that both our eyes will be opened. I am praying. Will you also?
posted
It is not important that you address it, it is just important that I do. Truth always brings light.
Also, I do not believe that it is Biblical that I pray for you about this. I do not know you, so I do not know how to pray. I cannot pray you out of your will, nor should I want to do so. I have not stood down from my position that you are where you are, and if The Lord has you there, I can not fight against Him.
Fact: If you are seeking The Lord with all of your heart, you will find Him... If you are not, you should be. The Lord understands your motives for being here (on the RCC) and you will not answer to me.
As for me personally, I am here finding what I have been looking for. I am finding like minded believers who want to be free! I know I myself have quite a way to go, but by the grace of God, I'm going.
I have lost all hope of being satisfied by just doing church things. I have tasted of The True Good News, and by The Lord's grace I'll never go back to the bondage of empty religion. I am one of many, Out Called of Christ.
Matthew
-------------------- Hope with abandon, all ye who enter here!
posted
Just one last thought on this regarding our will. It is the will of man that fights against God. We should pray that God's will be done, not man's. I pray that God will make me willing to be willing to let Him change me. We like to think that independence is freedom. However, that is not a Biblical teaching but rather a teaching of the world. We should rather desire to be fully dependent upon Christ. Christ wants us to be happy. But He wants us to be happy obeying Him. He wants us to be at peace. But the peace He gives is harmony with His government. Reconciliation between a human will that naturally resists God and a Sovereign God who along is Lord and Master in His Universe. Yes, we are called out by God but we are called out of this world, not just a building. The last any man can easily do and boast about it they will. The first, only God can do.
posted
A statement of fact, that agrees with the truth, is not a boast. I took the term "Out Called" from The Greek Interlinear Bible, that is all. The word "church" is no more in there than the words apostle, deacon, or bishops are. It is refreshing that no one equates the term with church. That's exactly the response I wanted.
Be blessed, Matthew
-------------------- Hope with abandon, all ye who enter here!
Email this page to someone.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Was Jesus just teasing us with "seek and you shall find" knowing that none will actually ever seek? Or do we need a better understanding of what Paul is actually saying. Oops! Romans 3:11 also says that none understandeth. If that's so then we shouldn't listen to Paul either since he can't possibly have any understanding. Oh no, a conundrum! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
That's exactly the response I wanted. 
