As an Adventist, the 666 pointed to the pope, yes... that was decided ...and yet, what about the dreaded Mark of the Beast? What was that thing on our forehead or hand that signified we could no longer worship on the true Sabbath and would prevent us from buying and selling? That was open to fantastic imaginative postulations from our social security number to involuntary sub-dermal electronic chips.
According to Adventists: Whatever the terrifying mark will be--that great deception that Christians will fall to--somehow it is tied to worshipping the beast and those who receive the Beast’s Mark will have no rest day or night (Rev. 14:11) then receive ugly and painful sores (Rev. 16:2). AND Sabbatarian Christians who don’t succumb to the deception, receive the the seal (mark) of Christ. The reward for their faithfulness will be that apostate Christians led by Catholics will hunt them down, persecuted them and behead them for their testimony of Jesus Christ (Rev. 20:4).
The coming end-times prophecies are Not really good news for anyone.
But what about this [original word in Greek deleted] (“sphragizo” Greek for seal, stamp or mark) of Christ? For Adventists-- it’s going to church and resting on the Sabbath (keeping the fourth commandment.) But what about Christians throughout history? Scriptures tell us that our fidelity to Jesus sets His seal on us--Jesus being Himself the seal (John 3:33, 6:27, II Tim. 2:19). But is there something Jesus meant to be a counterpart to the Mark of the Beast that shows we are His? What sign might there be that Christians have been using all along to signify they are sealed by Christ?
THE SIGN
It is done by the hand onto the forehead. It has been used in various forms by God’s people since the Jews drew the letter tau on their forehead symbolizing the law--Torah--is in their minds. It was the last thing many Christian martyrs did to show the world that they witnessed for Christ and were sealed by Him. It made such an impression on Roman non-believers that they often copied the Christians hoping to draw from its “magical powers” as a way of warding off troublesome spirits.
A second century Christian, Tertullian, recorded:
“In all our travels and movements, in all our comings in and going out, in putting on our shoes, at the bath, at the table, in lighting our candles, in lying down, in sitting down, whatever task occupies us, we mark our forehead with the sign of the cross.”
It began as a small cross against the forehead and eventually grew in meaning and size. When Christians touch their heads, it represents God the Father, tied to that we motion to our hearts representing God the Son who the Father sent down to us and then the shoulders represent the Holy Spirit. The Blessed Trinity is symbolized and also the idea that we worship God with all our mind (head), heart and soul (breast) and our strength (shoulders). Always incorporated into the sign of the Cross--our Redemption--the purchase of our eternal souls by His merciful blood and our new birth in Christ. This symbol, this seal of Christ, very deep and rich in meaning has been gestured against the Christian since the earliest of times.
Many early Christians wrote about this Christian sign, paralleling it with the saving mark of blood on the doorpost of the Hebrews homes before the Exodus. They also saw this sign in Ezekiel’s prophecy (Ez. 9:4) about those who are marked in the forehead by an angel for their sorrow at seeing the sins of God’s people. As well as John’s vision of seeing those in heaven with the name of the Father on the forehead of those with Him (Rev. 14:1, 22:4).
Perhaps we as Christians, and especially Adventists, need to spend more time on pondering the wonderful sign of Jesus in our hearts, minds and souls rather than on the Mark of the Beast. We should rejoice in the seal of Christ which is Jesus HIMSELF! Christ in us is the mystery kept secret from the foundations of the earth revealed in these last days for us. The sign of the cross reminds us that He is in us, He makes us holy, consecrates us, saves us, redeems us.
20 comments:
This is why I could not associate my thinking with the SDA movement. From the time I was a young boy, it wasn't the "anti-Christ" I wanted to know. It was and still is Christ that I want to hear about and know better every day, to have Him truly in me.
Thank-you again.
Ahhh, I won't attempt your username, but I know what you mean. Thanks for commenting!
You start off stating "as an Adventist" yet follow with questions that tell me you were not really an Adventist. How can you say "the coming end-time prophecies are Not really good news for anyone?" Revelation 1:1 begins by proclaiming the prophecie are the REVELATION of Jesus Christ, Rev 3:3 proclaims a blessing to those who read and hear the words and keep them! Sounds like good news to me.
The issue at the great climax before Jesus comes is worship (Rev. 13:8,12,15 & Rev 14:7,9,11) Clearly Rev 13 is Satans counterfeit system of worship to God's (Rev 14)true worship. Revelation 14:12 clearly reveals God's true worshipers by those that "keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus".
Adventist do not believe that the mark of the beast or the seal of God are literal marks, but rather a mark of distinction in worship. God's seal is only found "in their foreheads" (Rev 7:3), The mark of the beast is found in the righthand or in the forehead(Rev.13:16) signifying two clases those that go along with the beast by deeds (righthand) and those that submit by beliving the deception of the beast (forehead-[mind]).
As to the reward despite the persecution well for one it is spelled out in Revelation 14:1-5, and Rev Rev 14:13 just to mention a couple.
So what about the "sphragizo"? thats easy-follow Revelation 14:12 and you will be sealed. The Bible tells exactly what the counter is to the mark of the beast.It is not merely going to church on Sabbath or literally resting. And it certainly is not making some mark of the cross with your'e hand, that is laughable.
Arik,
Maybe I should have written, "When, as an Adventist..." Sorry for the confusion, as I am no longer one.
What I meant about the "coming end times" was again, stated how I saw the book of Revelation as an Adventist. It wasn't really good news as a kid hearing that either you were going to be marked with the beast and suffer torment or sealed with Christ and suffer torment.
Now, I certainly do not hold that opinion. I believe the majority of Revelation was as John said "soon to happen." So I take a modified preterist view of Revelation believing it was in the apocalyptic genre of the day and was meant for the early Christian church. Although God tends to have dual fulfillment of prophecies--so, who knows?
Being raised an Adventist and having gone to its schools elementary through university level, I am aware of their end time prophecies. But they are incorrect and skew scripture. Perhaps you should check our our book where that very subject is discussed.
The seal of God is clearly recorded in scripture. It is not a day of worship but Jesus himself and the Holy Spirit. You are seeing scripture through the lenses of Ellen White and Adventism doctrines.
The article does not claim the sign of the cross is the seal of God. Jesus IS the seal. The early Christians used it as an identifying mark--a sign of the seal.
Blessings on you and may the Lord open up His mighty truths for you!
Teresa
It can not be denied that Rev. 14 is the counter to Rev.13. I see Revelation through the historical method which has been known for hundreds of years before Ellen White or SDA.
The ones who worship the beast are the ones who suffer the wrath of God. As Rev. 14:13 even the martyrs who die from persecution are blessed. So to say that being on either side is not good is wrong.
I have your book, and find it to be misleading. The preterist view has gaps and skews scripture.
The seal of the Living God is undoubtedly connected with His law, (Isaiah 8:16,Rev 14:12). As an Adventist you understand that God's law is synonymous with His character, so to be sealed is to have God's character (Christ in us)in our minds.
Arik, as far as being blessed if you don't receive the mark, I agree with you. I was saying as a child the way it was presented to us in Bible classes made us all look like losers!
Neither the preterist, nor the Adventists interpretation of Revelation are complete. Both have gaps. All interpretations are simply speculation.
Could you give me some specifics as to how our book is misleading? People tend to throw out generalizations and never actually tell us what about it is misleading other than they don't agree with our position.
The Bible is clear that those who love the Lord keep his commandments and they become like Christ. But to make the monumental leap that the Sabbath day is the last-day defining mark of Christianity is not biblical.
God bless,
Teresa
The historical view of Revelation leaves no gaps, so I would be curious to know what you mean. The "Adventist" view of prophecy out dates Adventism, so the only way I would understand it to be "Adventist" is that we are one of the last people to hold onto the historical method of interpretation. Speculation? Absolutely not!
As Revelation 14 and specifically verse 12 point out-commandment keeping will be the defining mark of distinction-God's commandments also include the Sabbath-which insidently the fourth commandment identifies God as our Creator and the One who has authority to be worshipped.
as far as your book goes, I have no problem being more specific, it is something I have been wanting to do anyway, so when I have more time I will address it with you.
Mischaracterization in the book "It's ok not to be a SDA:
Preface xiv-The SDA church does not consider EGW to be the "SOLE authority to clarify scripture."
Former president J.Paulsen's quote is not speaking about the remnant being exclusive to SDA but rather expressing how I would feel too if I were to leave the SDA church. The only way I could leave the SDA message would be to have my conscience seered with a hot iron and abandon what is Truth to become "thinking" I am saved in a life of disobedience.
pg xv-You take a quote from EGW out of context to show her as promoting legalism when in fact she is showing the dangers of the once saved always saved doctrine.
"We are never to rest in a satisfied condition, and cease to make advancement, saying, "I am saved." When this idea is entertained, the motives for watchfulness, for prayer, for earnest endeavor to press onward to higher attainments, cease to exist. No sanctified tongue will be found uttering these words till Christ shall come, and we enter in through the gates into the city of God. Then, with the utmost propriety, we may give glory to God and to the Lamb for eternal deliverance. As long as man is full of weakness,--for of himself he cannot save his soul,--he should never dare to say, "I am saved." It is not he that putteth on the armor that can boast of the victory; for he has the battle to fight and the victory to win. It is he that endureth unto the end that shall be saved. The Lord says, "If any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him." If we do not go forward from victory to victory, the soul will draw back to perdition. We should raise no human standard whereby to measure character. We have seen enough of what men call perfection here below. God's holy law is the only thing by which we can determine whether we are keeping his way or not. If we are disobedient, our characters are out of harmony with God's moral rule of government, and it is stating a falsehood to say, "I am saved." No one is saved who is a transgressor of the law of God, which is the foundation of his government in heaven and in earth. {RH, June 17, 1890 par. 8}"
As to legalism:
" All legalism, all the sorrow and woe by which you may encompass yourself, will not give you one moment of relief. You cannot rightly estimate sin. You must accept God's estimate, and it is heavy indeed. If you bore the guilt of your sin, it would crush you; but the sinless One has taken your place, and though undeserving, He has borne your guilt. By accepting the provision God has made, you may stand free before Him in the merit and virtue of your Substitute. {BEcho, July 2, 1894 par. 3}"
Arik,
Once Ellen had "clarified" scripture, the church cannot go officially against her interpretation because she is considered a prophetess and her writings are "authoritative." So, when you are in a Sabbath School class and there are other theologians you would like to use to suggest a different interpretation of... say Daniel or Revelation than what Ellen has written, it is dismissed. Her commentary trumps any other scholars.
When on certain SDA scriptures she is the only interpreter left standing, I consider that "sole."
The SDA church does indeed teach that it is the only remnant. They voted on that in the 1990 GC... (or sometime there around.)
I actually do understand what you are saying about not leaving. You should NEVER leave if you believe you would be disobeying Christ and His commandments. I heartily concur with you. We must be obedient to Christ's commandments or we do not love him. I am with you my friend.
About the once saved always saved idea. I simply disagree. After reading all that she had written, I do not believe she would EVER have anyone say they are saved. It is partially due to a cheap grace mentality, but it is more. That is how I and many people sincerely take her as saying. That we must never be confident nor feel we are in God's favor. That has hurt many people Arik.
You personally may not take her that way, but you are probably a different generation than I am and she was not taught in SDA schools to be teaching against a cheap grace but against ever knowing that God thought you were "good enough."
Arik,
Another thing about Ellen is that you can pull out texts to support any position you wanted her to have--often times in the same paragraph. She was a master at double talk. She was also a master of superlatives--"the MOST important thing for a Christian" stuff similar to that.
I doubt many former Adventists would agree that the book is misleading. Perhaps it is a generational thing. Only certain writings were presented to you and in the most positive light. For this we can be very thankful. I am glad the SDA denomination is softening its presentation of her. It is a step in the right direction.
God bless,
Teresa
The remnant are the people who keep the commandment and have the testimony of Jesus. One could make a very impressive argument that John was speaking about first century Jewish Christians. It was only a remnant of Israel that accepted Jesus as Messiah.
We spend chapter after chapter debunking SDA prophecy on Revelation. I love you guys, but your prophecies about the last days are utterly egocentric. It is like Mormonism. From the SDA scholars I have spoken with about this, they won't even admit that other sabbatarians are going to be part of the remnant--only the SDA church. That is elitist and utterly against the words of Christ would warned us to unite that the world will know we are Christians.
You say "About the once saved always saved idea. I simply disagree. After reading all that she had written, I do not believe she would EVER have anyone say they are saved. It is partially due to a cheap grace mentality, but it is more. That is how I and many people sincerely take her as saying. That we must never be confident nor feel we are in God's favor. That has hurt many people Arik."
It seems to me you have not read "all" her writings. And though you and others are sincere, that is no proof of being right for you can be sincerely wrong! Besides the quote you use is out of context. I provided the context which is very different than what you portrayed in your'e book! To me that is being deceptive. You put her statement in the context that she is saying "unless we keep the commandments flawlessly we cannot be assured of salvation."pg xv. And yet you do not disclose her many statements that we are not saved by the law. This is mischaracterizing EGW and SDA! This is all throughout the book!!!
I certainly would not want you to be hurt or not confident in Christ. But at the same time I wish you not to be comfortable in believing that willful disobedience is the Gospel! This is not the "rest" that Jesus gives.
Arik,
Who could read ALL her writings (and even that isn't as easy answer as it seems because we have to ask what she really wrote? What her secretaries wrote under her name, what she just paraphrased from other writers?)
Yes, you indeed gave the context for a couple of quotes about being saved, but she wrote MANY! I have read them all and they are not all about cheap grace. You see, Ellen wrote contradictory things all the time. Every time I get into this with any Adventist it becomes a battle of EGW proof texting. And when someone writes from ALL SIDES and claims its authoritative anyone can prove anything they want about what she wrote. So proof-texting will do no good in trying to pin down exactly what Ellen meant for some days she was grace and mercy and other days she was fire and brimstone and that would be find (after all, she was a woman), except that she would write as if she were the pen of God and it would contradict an earlier statement. Very confusing and very schizophrenic.
Where on earth would you get the idea that I believed the willful disobedience of God is the gospel? Wow. I just got through writing you to NEVER disobey God about leaving Adventism.
If you love Him, you keep His commandments. My difference with Adventists is they keep a strange mixture of the Old and New Covenant laws. They pick and choose the ones they will keep. It is inconsistent.
I am a Christian in the New Covenant and bound by the laws of the New Covenant. Those Jesus spoke in Matthew on the Mt. of Blessings and throughout His ministry on earth. The New Covenant laws are the fulfillment of the Old. They are better and more comprehensive.
In the New Covenant, we are to become perfect even as our Father in heaven is perfect. That is an amazing thing! We can only do it by the grace of God and by a dying to self. It is by beholding the Lamb of God that we are changed from glory into glory.
Disobedience to God? If that is what you consider the New Covenant, then you do not understand it., Arik. But I certainly do not blame you. Many Christians out there believe God died to set us from the the bondage of sin in order to sin with no consequences. That is a terrible heresy. We are to turn from sin, Jesus Christ our beloved Savior set us free FROM sin, not TO sin.
So I can totally understand why you could think that. So many do.
God bless,
Teresa
And then often her own writings are cut and pasted into new books.
Arik,
Who could read ALL her writings (and even that isn't as easy answer as it seems because we have to ask what she really wrote? What her secretaries wrote under her name, what she just paraphrased from other writers? And then often her own writings are cut and pasted into new books.)
Yes, you indeed gave the context for a couple of quotes about being saved, but she wrote MANY! I have read them all and they are not all about cheap grace. You see, Ellen wrote contradictory things all the time. Every time I get into this with any Adventist it becomes a battle of EGW proof texting. And when someone writes from ALL SIDES and claims its authoritative anyone can prove anything they want about what she wrote. So proof-texting will do no good in trying to pin down exactly what Ellen meant for some days she was grace and mercy and other days she was fire and brimstone and that would be find (after all, she was a woman), except that she would write as if she were the pen of God and it would contradict an earlier statement. Very confusing and very schizophrenic.
Where on earth would you get the idea that I believed the willful disobedience of God is the gospel? Wow. I just got through writing you to NEVER disobey God about leaving Adventism.
If you love Him, you keep His commandments. My difference with Adventists is they keep a strange mixture of the Old and New Covenant laws. They pick and choose the ones they will keep. It is inconsistent.
I am a Christian in the New Covenant and bound by the laws of the New Covenant. Those Jesus spoke in Matthew on the Mt. of Blessings and throughout His ministry on earth. The New Covenant laws are the fulfillment of the Old. They are better and more comprehensive.
In the New Covenant, we are to become perfect even as our Father in heaven is perfect. That is an amazing thing! We can only do it by the grace of God and by a dying to self. It is by beholding the Lamb of God that we are changed from glory into glory.
Disobedience to God? If that is what you consider the New Covenant, then you do not understand it., Arik. But I certainly do not blame you. Many Christians out there believe God died to set us from the the bondage of sin in order to sin with no consequences. That is a terrible heresy. We are to turn from sin, Jesus Christ our beloved Savior set us free FROM sin, not TO sin.
So I can totally understand why you could think that. So many do.
God bless,
Teresa
We are not discussing EGW. We are discussing the mischaracterization of SDAism in your'e book and the fact you use a quote from her out of context to make a false claim. To me this is the very definition of deception.
You accused me of making general claims about your book, and yet that is exactly what you seem to be doing about EGW's writings.
I consider that the new covenant gospel is the same as the old covenant. Hebrews points out that the gospel was preached to them (Israel) but wasn't mixed with faith! They failed to enter into God's rest because of disobedience. The warning is not to fall into the same example.
The SDA church has a message to the world to preach the "everlasting" Gospel to the world (found in Rev. 14). Clearly this is the last message to go out just before Jesus comes! The Remnant are those that accept this Gospel no matter what denomination they are affiliated with. This Gospel will unite God's people all over the world. When this message goes out in all its Godly power, there will be those within the SDA church who will reject it, and there will be those who are not part of SDA who will accept it. The Remnant will NOT be inclusive to SDAism.
You are right that only by God's grace can we be perfect in Christ! Too bad many people reject the notion that the ten commandments (obedience to God) is not a part of the Gospel.
Arik,
I explained the context as I sincerely read it. Because we disagree does't indicate a deceptive motivation on my part.
The Old and New Covenants are related as the Old was a prophecy of Christ and the everlasting Kingdom of Heaven. The New is the fulfillment of that. Certainly morality doesn't change. We cannot simply murder, lie and be promiscuous as people of God within the context of any of His covenants.
The source of the Mosaic Covenant is the source of the New Covenant, but their laws are slightly different. They are both perfects laws. To give an example of what I mean think about the perfect law of a single person and the perfect law of a married person.
In the pre-marriage law, virginity is required. In the marriage covenant it is considered sinful to have one person insist on virginity. The marriage must be consummated. One sex is wrong, the other it is mandatory. Is God being contradictory? NO!
The Sabbath was part of the old covenant with the Jews. It was a shadow of what was to come in the New. Now the Sabbath rest is today, everyday.
Sunday is the celebration of the eighth day in scripture not the seventh. It is NOT a New Covenant Sabbath via the fourth commandment. It is a commemoration of the Resurrection! The Catholics since the beginning have church EVERY DAY!
God bless you,
Teresa
As you sincerely read it huh? Sincerity is no test of truthfulness. The context has been changed to make a point that does not exist. It is exactly what some reviewers said about your'e book, "Many of the facts in this book are taken way out of context.", "... book full of half-truths, mischaracterizations, insinuation and plain falsehoods"!
You said earlier the EGW statements can be used to say whatever you want, and that is exactly what I see you doing. The Bible can also be used to say whatever one wants also, it should be no surprise.
I am not trying to have a discussion with you about the law of God and His Sabbath, it is clear to me you have hardened your'e heart to His holy law and have now embarked on discrediting SDAism. The problem is how you do it with deception. This is not of God! What is painful is that the ones who will be deceived will be non Adventist who will not take the time to find out for themselves with an Adventist. Also that those who are deceived by your'e book will be on you.
Arik,
You accused me of being deceitful. What I can assure you is that I am not. You impugned my motivation. Now whether the Adventists are telling the truth about White or I am, that is a different topic altogether.
Critics of the book are arguing our interpretation of Ellen's statements. We did not change the statements, and in many of the quotes we included the context. We encouraged our readers to go directly to the texts and gave them the website and the footnote as to how to find the contexts of any quotes. If we were attempting to deceive anyone we would not have done that.
My dear fellow Christian Arik, I know exactly how you feel and how you think. I was an SDA for almost forty years and felt at one time as you do. It makes me very sorry that you fear people will be lead from the truth. I will be praying for you and please pray for me.
I have total faith in the sovereignty of God and His love and mercy. His will WILL be done. God will not allow me to deceive those who are truly seeking His Will, (according to your belief in what I am doing) just as I believe Adventism won't believe those who are truly seeking His will. And if there are those sheep who are so gullible that they ARE captured by wolves, God will go and get His sheep.
In Christian love my husband and I wrote the book for those SDAs who are leaving or have left the SDA church. We want to help them transition into a mainstream Christian church. I am sure you would agree with us, because they are not going back into Adventism. Don't you want them at least to be with other Christians?
God bless you Arik and I humbly ask for your prayer and will pray for you also.
Teresa
T.B.
I don't have your email, so this is how I am sending you a link to an interesting but what I consider somewhat odd article in the Gleaner.
(the Gleaner is a magazine for registered SDA in the pacific northwest of USA.)
It talks about how some SDA member's come accross as "rude".
what are your thought's on this?
LINK:
http://www.gleaneronline.org/105/12/41511.html
Post a Comment