Advent Talk
Issues & Concerns Category => 3ABN => Topic started by: Artiste on June 23, 2011, 11:08:17 PM
-
In the June, 2011, edition of 3ABN World, exerpts from Jim Gilley's "President's Letter" are as follows:
As a young man, I used to look at the difficulty, if not impossibility, of giving the gospel to the world. I would hear the phrase, “When the last missionary goes over the last hill with the gospel, then Christ will come.” I would think to myself, How long that would take! It seemed like it would never happen.
Even with the few programs that were preaching the third angel’s message, like The Voice of Prophecy, It Is Written, and Faith for Today, I knew it would be an enormous task...
How, oh Lord, how will it happen?
Then the Lord put the vision in Danny Shelton’s heart to begin 3ABN, preaching the three angels’ messages of Revelation, 24 hours a day, seven days a week...
-
Even with the few programs that were preaching the third angel’s message, like The Voice of Prophecy, It Is Written, and Faith for Today, I knew it would be an enormous task...
So 3ABN is able to give the message properly which is good since Voice of Prophecy, It is Written, and Faith for Today were not quite up to the task?
-
Even with the few programs that were preaching the third angel’s message, like The Voice of Prophecy, It Is Written, and Faith for Today, I knew it would be an enormous task...
So 3ABN is able to give the message properly which is good since Voice of Prophecy, It is Written, and Faith for Today were not quite up to the task?
Sources tell us that Jim Gilley cast the deciding vote in May 2008 after the directors were informed that the book deal scandal was true, and when Danny then had to leave the room while the directors voted on whether to boot him out of there.
-
Even with the few programs that were preaching the third angel’s message, like The Voice of Prophecy, It Is Written, and Faith for Today, I knew it would be an enormous task...
So 3ABN is able to give the message properly which is good since Voice of Prophecy, It is Written, and Faith for Today were not quite up to the task?
Sources tell us that Jim Gilley cast the deciding vote in May 2008 after the directors were informed that the book deal scandal was true, and when Danny then had to leave the room while the directors voted on whether to boot him out of there.
Then Jim Gilley needs to continue supporting Danny Shelton.
-
Even with the few programs that were preaching the third angel’s message, like The Voice of Prophecy, It Is Written, and Faith for Today, I knew it would be an enormous task...
So 3ABN is able to give the message properly which is good since Voice of Prophecy, It is Written, and Faith for Today were not quite up to the task?
Sources tell us that Jim Gilley cast the deciding vote in May 2008 after the directors were informed that the book deal scandal was true, and when Danny then had to leave the room while the directors voted on whether to boot him out of there.
Then Jim Gilley needs to continue supporting Danny Shelton.
Why?
-
So he won't look like he was making a mistake in supporting him in the past.
-
But I thought confession and repentance were a condition for salvation?
-
More politics than confession and repentance?
-
Were those reliable sources?
Even with the few programs that were preaching the third angel’s message, like The Voice of Prophecy, It Is Written, and Faith for Today, I knew it would be an enormous task...
So 3ABN is able to give the message properly which is good since Voice of Prophecy, It is Written, and Faith for Today were not quite up to the task?
Sources tell us that Jim Gilley cast the deciding vote in May 2008 after the directors were informed that the book deal scandal was true, and when Danny then had to leave the room while the directors voted on whether to boot him out of there.
-
I think so. As reliable as any.
And it's the only thing that makes sense. We were also told that some board members resigned in protest. That would be May 2008. Not till early 2009 did we find out who were the current board members. Garwin McNeilus, Stan Smith, and May Chung were gone. Larry Welch was also replaced by C.A. Murray.
Now why would Garwin and Stan have resigned if the story wasn't true?
And I don't see how anyone can question the idea that Danny was funneling 3ABN money into his pocket using book deals, kickbacks, and royalties.
Were those reliable sources?
Even with the few programs that were preaching the third angel’s message, like The Voice of Prophecy, It Is Written, and Faith for Today, I knew it would be an enormous task...
So 3ABN is able to give the message properly which is good since Voice of Prophecy, It is Written, and Faith for Today were not quite up to the task?
Sources tell us that Jim Gilley cast the deciding vote in May 2008 after the directors were informed that the book deal scandal was true, and when Danny then had to leave the room while the directors voted on whether to boot him out of there.
-
In the new July edition of 3ABN World, Jim Gilley says, "How often we here at 3ABN review how God gave Danny this dream, the reality of which is even greater than he could imagine in those early days!"
-
Personally I have no problem believing that God used Danny and Kenny to raise up the ministry. I also have no problem believing that Danny has taken the ministry in a direction God never intended and that God will, in His own time, make things right. I just hope it doesn't require shutting it down.
-
Personally I have no problem believing that God used Danny and Kenny to raise up the ministry. I also have no problem believing that Danny has taken the ministry in a direction God never intended and that God will, in His own time, make things right. I just hope it doesn't require shutting it down.
:goodpost:
I agree, youngwarrior. Very well said. And welcome to AdventTalk, by the way. I am glad you are here!
-
Youngwarrior, I am impressed! Excellent!
Personally I have no problem believing that God used Danny and Kenny to raise up the ministry. I also have no problem believing that Danny has taken the ministry in a direction God never intended and that God will, in His own time, make things right. I just hope it doesn't require shutting it down.
-
Yes, this verbiage is reminiscent of Castro, Chavez, Kim Jong Il, Rev Moon and all the other groups who are centered around a person and whose ability to function is exclusively centric to that one individual, or his decendents.
In the new July edition of 3ABN World, Jim Gilley says, "How often we here at 3ABN review how God gave Danny this dream, the reality of which is even greater than he could imagine in those early days!"
-
Yes, this verbiage is reminiscent of Castro, Chavez, Kim Jong Il, Rev Moon and all the other groups who are centered around a person and whose ability to function is exclusively centric to that one individual, or his decendents.
In the new July edition of 3ABN World, Jim Gilley says, "How often we here at 3ABN review how God gave Danny this dream, the reality of which is even greater than he could imagine in those early days!"
Could there possibly exist a cult within Adventism?
-
Yes, there exist various strange cults within Adventism. Not only is Adventism not immune to cults, the nature of its core beliefs regarding end-time prophecy make it a prime breeding ground for cults.
Yes, this verbiage is reminiscent of Castro, Chavez, Kim Jong Il, Rev Moon and all the other groups who are centered around a person and whose ability to function is exclusively centric to that one individual, or his decendents.
In the new July edition of 3ABN World, Jim Gilley says, "How often we here at 3ABN review how God gave Danny this dream, the reality of which is even greater than he could imagine in those early days!"
Could there possibly exist a cult within Adventism?
-
doesn't anyone else have a God Given dream? AND if no WHY NOT?
-
doesn't anyone else have a God Given dream? AND if no WHY NOT?
What evidence do we have that Danny really had a dream?
We can't simply take his word for it, since in his July 2006 affidavit he committed perjury when he pretended that he wasn't getting any income from book deals, despite getting a guesstimated $500,000 based on Remnant's Form 990's.
And then there was his telling Gailon in writing that Linda's car was titled in his name too when it wasn't.
And then there was Danny claiming he had all sorts of evidence against Linda, suing us over our alleged claiming that he didn't have biblical grounds for divorce, and then refusing to produce any of his so-called evidence against Linda. What a shady guy!
So Stan, on what basis can we say that Danny had any dream from God on a certain November evening in 1984?
-
I doubt many on here would say no one can have God-given dreams.
doesn't anyone else have a God Given dream? AND if no WHY NOT?
-
I haven't just taken Danny's word for it. Kenny told me basically the same story when I worked there. At that time Kenny was the VP. He said he and Danny had both had the same dream/impression to build a TV station. At the time they didn't even really know what a network was.
-
Was Kenny's part of the dream later officially transferred to Danny?
-
Bob..
a Couple of things...
I remember driving across Saskatchewan and seeing all these farms with those huge satellite dishes, the old ones, over vast areas that we had no or few church members, feeling really impressed that if we are going to reach folks like that all over rural Canada we are going to need a satellite TV network, it was an overwhelming experience that I still recall when ever I think of that day and time, I knew it needed to be done, but the task was overwhelming to me. There is more to that story but it really doesn't matter now.
I do not believe in once saved always saved, nor do I believe in once given divine instruction everything thing is divine instruction. I see no Biblical evidence that God only uses perfect people.
A few years ago, when they title of the vehicle was in question, if you would have asked me about my wife's car, I would have said the title was in her name. Much to my surprise it was in my name. I had wanted to tell you that then, but did not. Sometimes people make mistakes. I do, you do, Danny does.
Just sayin'
Stan
-
Sometimes people make mistakes. I do, you do, Danny does.
Stan,
I find it interesting that you would put Danny Shelton's mistakes in the same category as Bob Pickle's mistakes.
Now, putting your mistakes in the same category as Danny's...well... if you see it that way...
-
I haven't just taken Danny's word for it. Kenny told me basically the same story when I worked there. At that time Kenny was the VP. He said he and Danny had both had the same dream/impression to build a TV station. At the time they didn't even really know what a network was.
Interesting. I don't ever remember hearing that before, that Kenny had the same dream/impression.
-
I do not believe in once saved always saved, nor do I believe in once given divine instruction everything thing is divine instruction.
A fellow brought to church via 3ABN not long ago said regarding the 3ABN scandal, "That's why it's not once saved always saved." A pretty mature response, I thought, even though it was unfortunate that he heard anything about it.
A few years ago, when they title of the vehicle was in question, if you would have asked me about my wife's car, I would have said the title was in her name. Much to my surprise it was in my name. I had wanted to tell you that then, but did not. Sometimes people make mistakes. I do, you do, Danny does.
The problem, Stan, is that Danny not only said that the car was titled in his name, despite refusing to have it titled in his name, but he also said that he had proof that it was titled in his name. And then after the truth came out, Danny sued me over this specific issue.
If you thought your wife's car wasn't in your name, and I said it was, would you have sued me if I was proven to be correct?
But my point regarding Danny's lack of honesty was not that God doesn't use perfect people. My point was that you can't take Danny's word for anything. So on what basis can we say that Danny had a God-given dream? Not because Danny said so, that is for sure.
And what 3ABN has accomplished really has no bearing on whether or not God really did give a dream to Danny Shelton.
-
Two thouughts: Stan: if this is a God-given vision, then God doesn't need a plan "B". if He didn't deviate from His plan to bring Jesus through the line of the Jews, then He will not deviate from any other plan. Especially, not for one who received the vision and went left. God is not surprised by sin.
Bob: the proof is that "inspite" of Danny and his mess, 3ABN is still blessing and leading people to Christ. Danny has no power or authority to derail God's plan.
Let's go to my favorite biblically example for this. God chose David to be king. David subsequently had such a problem with women that it lead him to murder, lying, and several other offenses to the commandments. Yet, Jesus still came to earth through the bloodline of David, just as it was planned. God not only worked His plan "inspite" of David's failings, He also considered a "man after His own heart".
Lest you all need paramedics due to my analogy, it is only in respect to sins being committed after one is chosen/annointed(respectively) by God for a specific purpose.
doesn't anyone else have a God Given dream? AND if no WHY NOT?
What evidence do we have that Danny really had a dream?
We can't simply take his word for it, since in his July 2006 affidavit he committed perjury when he pretended that he wasn't getting any income from book deals, despite getting a guesstimated $500,000 based on Remnant's Form 990's.
And then there was his telling Gailon in writing that Linda's car was titled in his name too when it wasn't.
And then there was Danny claiming he had all sorts of evidence against Linda, suing us over our alleged claiming that he didn't have biblical grounds for divorce, and then refusing to produce any of his so-called evidence against Linda. What a shady guy!
So Stan, on what basis can we say that Danny had any dream from God on a certain November evening in 1984?
-
God sent Nathan the prophet to King David to confront him about his sin and he did not go unpunished if you recall. Who did God send to Danny?
-
David also repented and he let everyone know that he did. It would not be the same story if he had continued in his sin.
-
First, God did not want Saul, David or anyone else to be a king. He didn't want a human holding that position with the people, but they wanted to be like everyone else, so God chose Saul, not David. After Saul failed, David was chosen. We seem to forget that Saul was God's first choice and that he coalesced the people into a nation, but he failed and David was second place pick. Princess, could Danny be more accurately compared to Saul than David? Also, because of his sins, and in spite of his repentance, God did not allow David to build the temple which was to be God's house among the people.
-
Ok Murcielago, I can go with the comparison to Saul instead of David, but I thought it ws the people who chose Saul, because he was tall or nice looking, looked kingly or something like that. Plus He could not have chosen David as he was a child when he was annointed to begin with, he might not have been born or an toddler when Saul was made king.
That being said, my point is that God appointed David( and even Saul) knowing that they were not perfect. it was David's choice to repent, and we have no record of God changing his plan then changing it back once David repented. God chose/allowed both to be king knowing they had great potential for going left....and boy did they. God chooses nobody for his purposes who he thought would be perfect or even accomplish the mission perfectly. That was my point. And yes, David asked for forgiveness for the sin with Bathsheba, but do you all know how they verfified David was dead? I might post the text at lunchtime.
First, God did not want Saul, David or anyone else to be a king. He didn't want a human holding that position with the people, but they wanted to be like everyone else, so God chose Saul, not David. After Saul failed, David was chosen. We seem to forget that Saul was God's first choice and that he coalesced the people into a nation, but he failed and David was second place pick. Princess, could Danny be more accurately compared to Saul than David? Also, because of his sins, and in spite of his repentance, God did not allow David to build the temple which was to be God's house among the people.
-
I haven't just taken Danny's word for it. Kenny told me basically the same story when I worked there. At that time Kenny was the VP. He said he and Danny had both had the same dream/impression to build a TV station. At the time they didn't even really know what a network was.
Interesting. I don't ever remember hearing that before, that Kenny had the same dream/impression.
That may be due to Danny writing Kenny out of the story once Kenny was fired.
-
Jim Gilley is so deluded he still clings to the false belief he is entitled to "ordination'...based on the evidence, he is clearly not and has not been for several years...in my book he is not Pastor Gilley, he is not Elder Gilley, he is simply a deluded "Jim" Gilley.
He is irrelevant, just like Danny Lee Shelton!!! Another reason it will take a thousand years!!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter
-
In the Danish Union Church paper a series of three articles has appeared which indicate that Danny Shelton makes claims in his book on the Commandments which is contrary to the writings of Ellen White. How will that help finishing God's work on Earth? This happened after the Danish publishing house refused to publish Danny's book and it was then published privately.
-
Can you quote from the book? I would love to know what they have pinpointed.
-
The references are to the Danish edition of the book, and it is all in Danish. Here is a link:
http://adventist.dk/Default.aspx?ID=15858
-
Which pages, Johann?
-
Here is a better link to all three articles:
http://adventist.dk/Default.aspx?ID=16048
-
The author states he was perplexed when he had read the book because it was completely devoid of Jesus Christ.
-
Than you Johann. For those who would like to translate the articles, here is a link to google translate: http://translate.google.com/#da|en|
-
From previous experience with the Goodle translator I must warn that it is not fully dependable. When a word has multiple meanings - something you have in all languages - then Googles does not know which meaning it should translate. At times that may change the meaning.
I have just had Google translate the above into another language resulting in a terrible grammar. But then I made Google translate its own translation into Icelandic back to English. You see the results below:
Of previous experience with Goodle translator I have to warn that it is not fully reliable. When a word has multiple meanings - something that you are in any language - so Google does not know who does it should mean. Sometimes that can change the meaning.
-
Yes but when one knows the context it does help. Having read Waggoner and Jones and also EGW on righteousness by faith I can see the author's point. The law is to lead us to Christ Galatians 3:24.
-
Yes but when one knows the context it does help. Having read Waggoner and Jones and also EGW on righteousness by faith I can see the author's point. The law is to lead us to Christ Galatians 3:24.
Can you paste in what the author said on that, as translated? I'm particularly interested in what quotes they give from the book.
-
Yes but when one knows the context it does help. Having read Waggoner and Jones and also EGW on righteousness by faith I can see the author's point. The law is to lead us to Christ Galatians 3:24.
And Ellen White makes also a point of it in her letter to Uriah Smith from Australia around 1900. But there are a number of Adventist who are still in the dark on this point. Too bad this is still claimed to be the truth in some quarters.
-
Which pages, Johann?
Which pages are you referring to? The author, Lehnart Falk, is in charge of ADRA, Denmark, and he gives the page references to the Danish edition of DS's book. I have no way of giving you a comparison with the original English edition since the pages would not be the same. I was told that the Danish edition is a slight abbreviation where sections only applying to America and/or the KJV were deleted since the KJV is not used in Denmark.
-
Først senere kom hun med meget klare meldinger.
”Loven er en skolemester, der bringer os til Kristus, så vi kan blive retfærdiggjorte ved tro” (Gal 3,24)
Her i skriften taler Helligånden gennem apostlen specielt om den moralske lov. Loven afslører synd
og får os til at opleve vores behov for Kristus og flygte til ham for tilgivelse og fred gennem
omvendelse til Gud og tro på vores Herre Jesus Kristus.
Uvillighed til at slippe forudfattede meninger og at acceptere denne sandhed, var årsagen til den
store modstand, der kom til udtryk i Minneapolis imod Herrens budbringere brødrene Waggoner og
Jones. Ved at ophidse oppositionen lykkedes det Satan at udelukke - fra vores folk - et stort mål af en
speciel kraft fra Helligånden, som Gud længtes efter at give dem…”16
Derfor gør det ondt, når vi stadig ikke forstår denne lovens funktion. Loven (de ti bud) er en forbandelse for
os, siger Paulus. Ikke fordi loven er ond (Rom 7,12), men fordi jeg er falden. Kun Jesus kan udfri mig fra
denne forbandelse. Lovpris Jesus, som naglede forbandelsens skyldbrev til korset (Gal 3,13; Kol 2,14).
Lovens forbandelse kan ikke mere nå mig – Halleluja!
I næste artikel vil vi undersøge, hvad Paulus siger om loven i lyset af denne nye forståelse: ’At loven i
Galaterbrevet specielt er Guds lov’. 17
Danish to English translation
Only later, she came with very clear messages.
"The law is a schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, so we can become righteous by faith" (Galatians 3:24)
Here in the scripture speaks the Holy Spirit through the apostle especially about the moral law. The law reveals sin
and causes us to experience our need for Christ and flee to Him for forgiveness and peace through
repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.
Unwillingness to let go of preconceptions and to accept this truth was the reason for the
great resistance, expressed in Minneapolis against the Lord's messengers brothers Waggoner and
Jones. By fomenting opposition succeeded Satan to exclude - from our people - a major goal of a
special power of the Holy Spirit that God longed to give them ... "16
Why does it hurt when we still do not understand this law function. Law (the Ten Commandments) is a curse for
us, says Paul. Not because the law is evil (Romans 7.12), but because I have fallen. Only Jesus can deliver me from
this curse. Praise Jesus, who nailed curse guilt letter to the Cross (Gal. 3.13; Colossians 2.14).
Act curse can no longer reach me - Hallelujah!
In the next article we will examine what Paul says about the law in light of this new understanding: 'The law of
Galatians specifically the law of God '. 17
13
13
-
Which pages, Johann?
Which pages are you referring to? The author, Lehnart Falk, is in charge of ADRA, Denmark, and he gives the page references to the Danish edition of DS's book. I have no way of giving you a comparison with the original English edition since the pages would not be the same. I was told that the Danish edition is a slight abbreviation where sections only applying to America and/or the KJV were deleted since the KJV is not used in Denmark.
I'm interested in which page numbers of the article quote from and comment upon Danny's book.
-
Først senere kom hun med meget klare meldinger.
”Loven er en skolemester, der bringer os til Kristus, så vi kan blive retfærdiggjorte ved tro” (Gal 3,24)
Her i skriften taler Helligånden gennem apostlen specielt om den moralske lov. Loven afslører synd
og får os til at opleve vores behov for Kristus og flygte til ham for tilgivelse og fred gennem
omvendelse til Gud og tro på vores Herre Jesus Kristus.
Uvillighed til at slippe forudfattede meninger og at acceptere denne sandhed, var årsagen til den
store modstand, der kom til udtryk i Minneapolis imod Herrens budbringere brødrene Waggoner og
Jones. Ved at ophidse oppositionen lykkedes det Satan at udelukke - fra vores folk - et stort mål af en
speciel kraft fra Helligånden, som Gud længtes efter at give dem…”16
Derfor gør det ondt, når vi stadig ikke forstår denne lovens funktion. Loven (de ti bud) er en forbandelse for
os, siger Paulus. Ikke fordi loven er ond (Rom 7,12), men fordi jeg er falden. Kun Jesus kan udfri mig fra
denne forbandelse. Lovpris Jesus, som naglede forbandelsens skyldbrev til korset (Gal 3,13; Kol 2,14).
Lovens forbandelse kan ikke mere nå mig – Halleluja!
I næste artikel vil vi undersøge, hvad Paulus siger om loven i lyset af denne nye forståelse: ’At loven i
Galaterbrevet specielt er Guds lov’. 17
Danish to English translation
Only later, she came with very clear messages.
"The law is a schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, so we can become righteous by faith" (Galatians 3:24)
Here in the scripture speaks the Holy Spirit through the apostle especially about the moral law. The law reveals sin
and causes us to experience our need for Christ and flee to Him for forgiveness and peace through
repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.
Unwillingness to let go of preconceptions and to accept this truth was the reason for the
great resistance, expressed in Minneapolis against the Lord's messengers brothers Waggoner and
Jones. By fomenting opposition succeeded Satan to exclude - from our people - a major goal of a
special power of the Holy Spirit that God longed to give them ... "16
Why doesTherefore it hurt when we still do not understand this law function. Law (the Ten Commandments) is a curse for
us, says Paul. Not because the law is evil (Romans 7.12), but because I have fallen. Only Jesus can deliver me from
this curse. Praise Jesus, who nailed curse guilt letter to the Cross (Gal. 3.13; Colossians 2.14).
Act curse can no longer reach me - Hallelujah!
In the next article we will examine what Paul says about the law in light of this new understanding: 'The law of
Galatians specifically the law of God '. 17
13
13
A fairly good translation! I have marked only one place where the meaning is changed slightly.
-
Which pages, Johann?
Which pages are you referring to? The author, Lehnart Falk, is in charge of ADRA, Denmark, and he gives the page references to the Danish edition of DS's book. I have no way of giving you a comparison with the original English edition since the pages would not be the same. I was told that the Danish edition is a slight abbreviation where sections only applying to America and/or the KJV were deleted since the KJV is not used in Denmark.
I'm interested in which page numbers of the article quote from and comment upon Danny's book.
I'd say all three articles are commenting on the effects of Danny's book, and his book is the reason the articles were written.
-
Bob my take on the Danish article is that they object to the concept (in the Ten Commandments Twice removed and anywhere else) that it was only the ceremonial law and the law of ordinances that was against us and was nailed to the cross but not the moral law. This would undercut Paul’s argument that the law no longer judges us but it is Christ who says “Neither do I condemn thee. Go and sin no more.”
In our own strength we may outwardly keep the law but the law like a mirror can only show us where we are dirty. Like a mirror, it was not meant to clean us up. Even if we only had sinned once, we are sinners and by our present and future law keeping we can not go back and undo the past. The law can only condemn us, it cannot reform or redeem us. And in our own strength we can only outwardly keep the law and sometimes that only intermittently.
Only when we come to Christ can we and do we love God with all our hearts and our neighbors as ourselves. God is love. His law is a low of love. It is not that grace makes the law of no effect. For “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."
It is not that we become lawless but that in Christ only can we truly keep it. (the law)
Romans 6:1 through 4
-
By the way, I am no greek scholar and though Colossians 2:14 is refering to the "handwriting of ordinances that was against us and was nailed to the cross." In Galatians however Paul is talking about the moral law also and righteousness by faith is not lawlessness nor some vague feeling of sentimental "love" toward God or one's fellow man but bearing the fruit of the spirit which will result in obeying the 10 commandments (treating God as He wishes to be treated- no worship of graven images, Sabbath rest, making God supreme and not taking His name in vain. And not killing, envying, committing adultry, dishonoring parents, stealing and not only outwardly but from the heart.)
-
As Sister White stated, the schoolmaster of Gal. 3:24 that leads us to Christ is both the moral and the ceremonial law, but especially the moral law.
But I think to say that the moral law was what was nailed to the cross in Col. 2:14 is going too far.
- That text refers to handwriting, while the 10 Commandments were finger-writing.
- You can't blot out something engraved on stone: the letters won't wash away, and the only think that will disappear if you use an eraser is the eraser.
- You can't pound a nail through stone.
-
I think I misspoke there and that the Danish article didn't go that far either. I would have to go back and check all three articles again. I was writing from memory and not checking thouroughly. My memory isn't the best. I shoul have referenced it more thouroughly before ascribing that to the author. Yes Collossians 2:14 is not refering to the moral law but Galatians is refering to both.
-
De kunne kun fås gennem løfterne om ham, som skulle komme (Gal 3,18). Hele det
ceremonielle system pegede frem til ham, som skulle komme. Sinaj pagten eller den gamle pagt kunne kun
føre til trældom og slaveri (Gal 4,25), den kunne aldrig sætte mennesker fri. Det er kun Kristus, der kan
3 Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary. Bind. 6 s. 934
4 Ellen G. White. “Signs” Nov. 5, 1890. s. 3.
5 Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary. Bind. 6 s. 933
6 Secventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary. Bind 6. ”Introduktion til Galaterbrevet” s. 933
3
sætte fri (Gal 5,1). Da Jesus kom, blev teokratiet og aftalen med Israel ophævet, lovens krav blev opfyldt, og
lovens forbandelser blev naglet til korset. Det system jøderne troede, de skulle få liv ved, og den
teokratiske pagt, som Gud indgik med Israel inklusiv de ti bud, den er kun gyldig til ham, der var lovet
(Jesus) kom (Gal 3,19).
Med Jesus blev løftet opfyldt, og
Danish - detected to English translation
They could only be obtained through promises of Him who should come (Gal. 3:18). the entire ceremonial system pointed forward to Him who was to come. Sinai Pact or the old covenant could only lead to servitude and slavery (Galatians 4.25), it could never put people off. It is only Christ who can 3 Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary. Tie. 6 p. 934 4 Ellen G. White. "Signs" in November 5, 1890. p. 3 5 Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary. Tie. 6 p. 933 6 Secventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary. Tie 6th "Introduction to Galatians" p. 933 3 set free (Gal. 5.1). When Jesus came, theocracy and the agreement with Israel lifted the statutory requirements were met and Act curses were nailed to the cross. The system of the Jews thought they should get life in and theocratic covenant which God made with Israel, including the Ten Commandments, it is only valid for him that was promised (Jesus) came (Galatians 3.19). As Jesus was lifted met and
Bob, Perhaps this was the section where I picked up the phrase from Colossians. But you are entirely correct.
-
As Sister White stated, the schoolmaster of Gal. 3:24 that leads us to Christ is both the moral and the ceremonial law, but especially the moral law.
But I think to say that the moral law was what was nailed to the cross in Col. 2:14 is going too far.
- That text refers to handwriting, while the 10 Commandments were finger-writing.
- You can't blot out something engraved on stone: the letters won't wash away, and the only think that will disappear if you use an eraser is the eraser.
- You can't pound a nail through stone.
What was nailed to the cross? Nothing, according to the translation I am using. It states that Christ removed the curse, and there is a strong indication that the curse is the curse resting on me because I have not lived according to the commanments.
I find it a challenging question, What would we do with the Investigating Judgment, 1844, etc. if we claim that any law has been nailed. . .
I have no issue with the translators of the latest Icelandic edition of the Bible who state that it is the curse that disappears, and not the commandments.
-
On the other hand the author quotes Colossians 2:14 three times and it seems to me that he may be using that text in reference to the moral law also. Am I mistaken? This is what had me confused as to the author's position.
I did find this letter on the internet:
http://www.truthdepot.net/content/OpenLettertoLindaShelton.pdf
and you can see by its context that it is a somewhat old one. But it accuses Shelly Quinn and Danny Shelton of taking that exact same position and applying Colossians 2:14 to the moral law. I could not say whether they do that or not.
-
Seems to me like the context is the key to understand this.
Colossians 2:10-16 (New International Version)
10 and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority. 11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.
13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. 15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.
16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.
We were dead in sin - and then God makes us alive by forgiveness in Christ. Just look at the picture Paul paints here. Here he calls redemption in Christ a new circumcision. "Let no one condemn you. . ." puts salvation in a new dimension. Salvation is not a condemnation of the sinner but a rescue from death. That condemnation is nailed on the cross.
Even as a child I saw these verses as a joy. Brought up in Sabbath School watching the Commandments, praying God would help me keep them. Yet some of my neighbor children were "condemning" me for keeping the Sabbath and fulfilling other eating requirements. Then I read this text which states that in Christ there is no condemnation - and the Sabbath and all the rest became a delight and I pitied those who could not see it and who did not receive the true blessings from above.
Therefore I cannot see this as if the law itself is nailed to the cross.
-
In my previous post I have left some corners open for further discussion - something I welcome.
-
What was nailed to the cross? Nothing, according to the translation I am using. It states that Christ removed the curse, and there is a strong indication that the curse is the curse resting on me because I have not lived according to the commanments.
I find it a challenging question, What would we do with the Investigating Judgment, 1844, etc. if we claim that any law has been nailed. . .
I have no issue with the translators of the latest Icelandic edition of the Bible who state that it is the curse that disappears, and not the commandments.
It is true that this is the other possible explanation, that Col. 2:14 is talking about the condemnation being nailed to the cross rather than the ceremonial law.
I favor the latter possibility since then Col. 2 parallels Eph. 2, which refers to the taking away of the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile. I don't see how the condemnation against all of us can be the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile, but the ceremonial law certainly was.
-
What was nailed to the cross? Nothing, according to the translation I am using. It states that Christ removed the curse, and there is a strong indication that the curse is the curse resting on me because I have not lived according to the commanments.
I find it a challenging question, What would we do with the Investigating Judgment, 1844, etc. if we claim that any law has been nailed. . .
I have no issue with the translators of the latest Icelandic edition of the Bible who state that it is the curse that disappears, and not the commandments.
It is true that this is the other possible explanation, that Col. 2:14 is talking about the condemnation being nailed to the cross rather than the ceremonial law.
I favor the latter possibility since then Col. 2 parallels Eph. 2, which refers to the taking away of the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile. I don't see how the condemnation against all of us can be the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile, but the ceremonial law certainly was.
What complicates this is that I think Paul might be using the term "Jew" for those who think they can be justified just by keeping the laws (plural) and do not need a saving faith in the atonement of Jesus Christ on the cross. Isn't that the idea when he is referring to Peter?
-
We have to watch out that we miss the main point of this discussion. It may be important to understand what Paul means when he speaks of the law in Galatians, and what Ellen White says about that. But the main point that the author of the articles deals with is the sadness he feels because the book on the commandments twice renounced fails to bring the reader to see Jesus Christ. There he refers to the admonition given by Ellen White as well in this connection.
We have to watch out that our discussion does not get so involved in which commandments that we forget Jesus Christ and the main Corner Stone in our Salvation.
Many of us love to quote 1 John 3:4. It gives a completely new dimension of Jesus Christ in that connection when you compare that verse with the rest of the chapter. No matter how much I tell some people to do that they will stick to verse 4, and that verse alone. Is that fair?
-
If one looks at what is taught as the gospel truth in many sda circles, one has to question whether God suffers from a severe case of MPD.
-
I think understanding the difference between the two laws is important but the main thing is to uplift Christ.
Remember it was the correct understanding of which law (both) was discussed in Galatians that led to the revelation of the beauty of Christ, His glory and His love to Waggoner and Jones and which might have led to the finishing of the work in or around 1888.
The author of the Danish article indeed does claim that the book by DS and SQ disappoints because he could not find Jesus in it but then he goes on to discuss why he feels this way.
It seems to me that there are two mistakes that can be made. One is to misuse Colossians 2:14 as an excuse to practice lawlessness and the other is to claim that it was only the ceremonial law that is spoken of in Galatians. The author of the Danish article perhaps believes there was a 3rd mistake made. He believes that DS and SQ have focused on the difference between the ceremonial law and the 10 commandments in an effort to defend the Sabbath to such an extent that Christ himself and His love is hidden. It seems that he believes that DS and SQ have unnecessarily used that difference to defend the Sabbath.
Back in 1888 the opposition to Waggoner and Jones felt and many feel today that the correct understanding of the law in Galatians or righteousness by faith is also an excuse to practice lawlessness. Instead it does the opposite.
-
I think understanding the difference between the two laws is important but the main thing is to uplift Christ.
Remember it was the correct understanding of which law (both) was discussed in Galatians that led to the revelation of the beauty of Christ, His glory and His love to Waggoner and Jones and which might have led to the finishing of the work in or around 1888.
The author of the Danish article indeed does claim that the book by DS and SQ disappoints because he could not find Jesus in it but then he goes on to discuss why he feels this way.
It seems to me that there are two mistakes that can be made. One is to misuse Colossians 2:14 as an excuse to practice lawlessness and the other is to claim that it was only the ceremonial law that is spoken of in Galatians. The author of the Danish article perhaps believes there was a 3rd mistake made. He believes that DS and SQ have focused on the difference between the ceremonial law and the 10 commandments in an effort to defend the Sabbath to such an extent that Christ himself and His love is hidden. It seems that he believes that DS and SQ have unnecessarily used that difference to defend the Sabbath.
Back in 1888 the opposition to Waggoner and Jones felt and many feel today that the correct understanding of the law in Galatians or righteousness by faith is also an excuse to practice lawlessness. Instead it does the opposite.
I'd have an awful hard time disagreeing with you!
-
How close is the timing of this to the timing of the request to have the lawsuit against you and Joy dismissed?
I think so. As reliable as any.
And it's the only thing that makes sense. We were also told that some board members resigned in protest. That would be May 2008. Not till early 2009 did we find out who were the current board members. Garwin McNeilus, Stan Smith, and May Chung were gone. Larry Welch was also replaced by C.A. Murray.
Now why would Garwin and Stan have resigned if the story wasn't true?
And I don't see how anyone can question the idea that Danny was funneling 3ABN money into his pocket using book deals, kickbacks, and royalties.
Were those reliable sources?
Even with the few programs that were preaching the third angel’s message, like The Voice of Prophecy, It Is Written, and Faith for Today, I knew it would be an enormous task...
So 3ABN is able to give the message properly which is good since Voice of Prophecy, It is Written, and Faith for Today were not quite up to the task?
Sources tell us that Jim Gilley cast the deciding vote in May 2008 after the directors were informed that the book deal scandal was true, and when Danny then had to leave the room while the directors voted on whether to boot him out of there.
-
How close is the timing of this to the timing of the request to have the lawsuit against you and Joy dismissed?
In order to dismiss the suit, they had to come up with excuses to do so. June 26-27, 2008 was when Ronnie got the ball going on that, spreading the unsubstantiated and impossible rumor that the IRS had totally vindicated Danny and 3ABN.
They filed for dismissal on October 23, the day after Simpson led the court in southern Illinois to believe that dismissal was anything but imminent, since he led that court to believe that they would be complying with a court-ordered discovery date, which was October 27, a date he had no intention of complying with.
I really think Jim Gilley, Walt Thompson, and Danny Shelton should be disciplined by their local churches for such deceptions. It was a clear violation of the 10 Commandments.