Hey Harry, forgot about your timely 016 article, thanks for link.
As far as the above interchange, i think Scott meant “without” (being a universalist-i think thats code for someone not as much lost in heresy as. say, a Fordite)
VFYes, so if you don’t believe in the Investigative Judgment, then why bother to be an Adventist? And if you aren’t an Adventist, then are you sure that what you read about the IJ is truly what we believe?
I take it that you can’t explain II Timothy 4:10, so that is why you want me to go first. Nice try. As far as I know Desmond had no good answer to that verse as well.
How about this one:
Hebrews 11:39-40 what is needed of God’s people before all the men and women of faith can go to heaven?
There is much that Desmond did not explain.
Why is there a second apartment in the sanctuary if forgiveness concluded in the first apartment and never went in to the second apartment, and everything was completed at the cross?
If “our righteousness is as filthy rags”, then why are we judged on our behavioral performance in the IJ?
On the day of atonement in Leviticus 16, how does the priest make an atonement for the altar of burnt offering?
If we were reconciled by Christ’s death, then why does the same verse tell us that we “shall be saved by his life”?
So according to the Bible, God saved ALL men, especially those who believe, and he also will save people with his life. Desmond never addressed all of these 3 phases of salvation.
Why in the book of Daniel is there a reference to a judgment that you say does not exist?
1 Like
I suspect he did explain…but precious few could be bothered to critically evaluate all of it, unlike George…
Some even thought they already knew enough.
2 Likes
Thanks, @Scottmesh.
You said:
In response:
a) With all due and appropriate respect, you may have to read more critically, Mr. Esh. (This could have been what @GeorgeTichy was partially implying when he asked you if you’d read the GV manuscript.)
In my masterpiece, I said:
But here’s what’s interesting: The fact of these obstacles does not mean that the investigative judgment doctrine is not true. (Indeed, nowhere, here, have I said that it is not.)
So, I have not said I don’t believe in the Investigative Judgment.
b) If you can show me the official document that says, “If you don’t believe in the Investigative Judgment, then don’t bother to be an Adventist,” I’ll respond in kind.
Bonus points if you can find one that I signed.
You said:
In response:
Nice try, but that’s not why I asked you to go first.
You said:
In response:
Have you ever heard the putdown where, comparing two people—one an expert, the other merely insolent—a third one says, “He’s probably forgotten more stuff than you know”?
You said:
In response:
Forgiveness from sin.
You said:
In response:
Exodus 25:8.
You said:
In response:
You’d have to ask someone who believes in “the Investigative Judgment.”
You said:
In response:
“Burnt freeing”?
You said:
In response:
His death is justification. His life is sanctification.
You said:
In response:
Have you read Dr. Ford’s definitive 992-page Glacier View manuscript, Daniel 8:14, the Day of Atonement, and the Investigative Judgment?
You said:
In response:
Because you believe in it.
The Bible often works that way, Mr. Esh: People see things they want to see in it.
Adventists—if you are one—are not immune to this illness.
Rock on!!
HA
3 Likes
Wow:
It’s rare that I insist everyone read another commenter’s post.
But you MUST read @WJH’s reply to @Ken, “Glacier View—Why It Happened,” here:
WJH is Dr. W. John Hackwell. This comment appears under his elegy, “Reflections on My Time at Avondale under Des Ford.”
As I told @gford1, “He writes as though aflame.”
HA
5 Likes
Indeed, unbelievable commentary. Makes me miss Aage Rendalen.
Thanks.
5 Likes
Just as I suspected. Your answers indicate an understanding of the IJ that is commonly taught by the GC which you use as a reference point, as well as the different understanding taught by Desmond Ford that you believe. I believe that both understandings have issues, and from what I see in this thread, no one seems to be truly open, so due to the massive amount of study material needed to explain the subject, I am going to leave all of you alone to believe whatever you want to believe, and simply continue to believe what I know from my Bible studies.
Just for the record, I have well over a thousand, perhaps two thousand, pages of careful Bible studies on Salvation that I have done myself, so I may be unknown to you, but I am no lightweight.
I may not know every microscopic point he made at GV, but once I saw major mistakes in his presentations, there was no need to see the rest. The fact that he came up with conclusions so incorrect proved to me that whatever method of Bible study he used was incorrect, so that makes everything else deeply suspect to being incorrect. If your method of Bible study is flawed, then everything needs to be carefully studied in order to see what else is incorrect.
I’m done wasting my time here. You all have already made up your mind as to what you believe. For your sakes, I hope you all are right, but I don’t believe so.
1 Like
At some time or another an assessment of one’s acceptance or otherwise of the merits of Christ must be made by the Heavenly Being/s. Whether that is during the period from around 1844 seems almost immaterial.
Further, one must also understand that forgiveness, while available to individuals for the future is not available to the sinner until that future has become the present, else the teaching will be, “once saved always saved,” perhaps denying the free choice God has made available to everyone, for the future.
The interesting information that I’ve come across recently is that much of the SDA interpretation of the 2300 days/years as well as the 1260 days/years seems to have been formulated from around the 13th century and settled among many prior to the preaching of William Miller.
1 Like
Thanks, @Scottmesh.
With all due and appropriate respect:
I really hope that your 3rd way approach finds the audience it deserves, especially since you’ve crafted two thousand pages of careful Bible studies.
However—without knowing anything about your hermeneutics, because you’ve said nothing legible about them—hurling snark from the back of the room at a much beloved, recently deceased scholar, then baiting his followers with queries is not the way to win friends and influence people.
When Des Ford was called to explain his view of the sanctuary doctrine, he could have asked snitty questions of his peers, urinated on their answers, then declared himself the winner. He actually possessed the status to do this.
He didn’t do that, though. Instead, he took a year off and wrote a 1,000-page manuscript. Because of the breadth and depth of his work, and his sizable influence on the SDA Church, any attempt to address this theological issue historically must grapple with what he has said.
One may disagree, or agree, with his views. But you’ve done neither. You’ve merely tossed out vague quasi-critiques of Ford and his work, and belittled the posts of others.
"Who are you, and why should anyone care what you have to say?" I’m not actually asking you this question. My point is that this is the query you raise in the minds of others when you show up on a message board, don’t contribute, put down the responses of those you semi-engage, while lifting your own genius aloft to catch the glint of the reflecting sun. What a beautiful sight.
If this sounds like I’m angry or upset, I’m not at all. Not in the least. I would traipse down to Hilham today, buy you a root beer, and talk about whatever you want to discuss, if you wanted. I’d just watch you, closely, out of one eye, because, overall, you sound mad insecure.
Peace and blessings!
HA
11 Likes
From a mental health standpoint, the behavioral template of the IJ is imprinted during the formative years of childhood when the child is developing a conscience and a set of good behavior. The most common venue is to hold him responsible for his behavior which frequently takes the form of “Johnny, wait til your father gets home.” Its counterpart is frequently seen among children who have been neglected emotionally by their parents, or those who have been subjected to trauma early in life. These children have skewed expectations and being held responsible to their actions appears a joke to them. So indeed you are right, that the IJ template is formed as a developmental milestone during our childhood years and a child who fails to develop self confidence but instead develops a harsh set of parental conscience become vulnerable to issues of guilt such as IJ.
@ajshep
1 Like
I dont recall ever being unnerved by the Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment. After all the very worst that could happen is that one would become as though one never was. Besides, the Doctrine has some good things going for it. One of these is that it is figurative way denying the Doctrine of Predestination. Instead of throwing it out, I think we should mine it for theological treasures we have overlooked.
6 Likes
David,
good things going for it, One of these is that it is figurative way denying the Doctrine of Predestination. <<
You are not opposed to this predestination are you?
“He predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace 8 that he lavished on us. With all wisdom and understanding, 9 made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10 to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ.
11 In him we were also chosen having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, 12 in order that we, who were the first to put our hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. 13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.” Eph.1:5-
Predestination, proorisas, is a biblical term. I just would like that made clear also…what you oppose is “double predestination”—Correct? Some being predestined to damnation/reprobation? The IJ, as taught, puts doubt in the hearts of those given the mark/seal of the Spirit guaranteeing our inheritance, rather placing it on our performance…rather than Christ’s and His Spirit’s.
Regards,
Pat
1 Like
I believe you have touch on a exactly the way many others feels and experience church life.
There many others who share in the big picture view of what Adventism could be.
Sadly it is not the church that I, you, Des and so many others thought it could be.
Present Truth will continue, and Des will always be remember as a champion of this approach.
6 Likes
Wow, What a response to the passing of a true Christain Scholar. Righteousness by Faith manifested in a life of a true disciple. He fed the hungry for Truth, and set free those bound by fear of judgment, and comforted those that mourned. He certainly taught and followed his belief and love of a Gospel unpolluted by human ego.
12 Likes
Yes. Most certainly. I am opposed to all expressions of double election of which I have knowledge and many forms of single election.
No doctrine has ever given Christians complete and permanent assurance of salvation.
The doctrine of double election comes closest to doing so for those who are persuaded that they are among the fortunate whom God has elected for salvation. Yet even it fails because those who believe in double election do not always have the assurance that they are among those whom God has elected for everlasting joy. Coupled with their belief in hell as unending pain, their lack of assurance has been the source of much psychologic tension. Soner or later we all cry as did Jesus, “My God, My God! Why have you forsaken me?” There is only one possible relief and it is more than good enough: “Into your hands I give my spirit.”
If I had to choose between IJ and TULIP, I’d choose the first without hesitation. This is why I say that it has some good things going for it.
1 Like
I’m sorry–I know a lot of acronyms, but what does TULIP mean?
If you are such a “big shot,” and have such a great confidence in your theological position, why don’t you at least tell us who you are? It’s weird to talk to real big shots who don’t let us know how big they are…
6 Likes
I’m glad I don’t have to choose between IJ or TULIP. 
3 Likes
Total deparivity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, perseverance of the saints. A Slogan Of Calvinism.
2 Likes