| Author |
Message |
Nowisee
Registered user
Username: Nowisee
Post Number: 751
Registered: 5-2009
| | Posted on Friday, March 04, 2011 - 4:24 pm: |     |
Definition of "transcript" (Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary, p. 2009) :
1. a written, typewritten, or printed copy; something transcribed or made by transcribing. 2. an exact copy or reproduction, esp.one having an official status. 3. an official report supplied by a school on the record of an individual student, listing subjects studied, grades received, etc. 4.a form of something as rendered from one alphabet or language to another. [Latin transcriptum: thing copied]. |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 12322
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 04, 2011 - 5:14 pm: | |
Nowisee, your post just put the missing puzzle piece in place for me. The problem with the SDA "transcript" idea is that is actually DOES limit God to mere written words. In fact, this detail gives the foundation to their resistance to the idea of the law being written on our hearts by the Holy Spirit.
They didn't accidentally use the word "transcript"; it was chosen because it precisely conveyed the meaning they wanted understood: God's character can be understood and grasped by reading the Decalogue. And if they have a literal "transcript" of God's character, that trumps all other revelations, because a transcript is an exact and perfect copy. It is official and authoritative, and it cannot be argued with.
Therefore, the law written on the heart must not be greater than, more abstract than, or more inclusive than the transcript or it no loner represents God. Hence they insist it's the Decalogue that's written on the heart.
Oh, yes--the word "transcript" is no accident! It's another of those straw-man arguments that creates a sense of "rightness", but it's really a built-in diminution of our sovereign God.
Yes, Rick--the gospel does reveal God's character. I think it's not the idea of the gospel being a revelation of God's righteousness and mercy and justice that I objected to, though...it's the idea of "transcript" that's been bothering me. And I think I just figured out why with the help of Nowisee's post.
Jesus is not able to be transcripted in written words. He has been revealed to us via God's words in Scripture which have been made alive by their author, the Holy Spirit, but God's word is not like mere transcription because it's living and whole.
Colleen |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 747
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, March 04, 2011 - 8:33 pm: | |
I wasnt even looking at the implications of the word "transcript"; I was too busy focusing on where they thought the best and most complete understanding of Who God is could be found. There I saw the contrast between the Cross and the tablets of stone.
I think the real reason that so many SDAs find the symbol of the cross offensive is that they can not accept the message of the cross. The cross is absent from most SDA churches just like the cross is absent from their theology. |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 12323
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 - 12:33 am: | |
Totally agree, Rick!
Colleen |
Animal
Registered user
Username: Animal
Post Number: 874
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 - 12:47 pm: | |
Jesus said....
"If youve seen Me, youve seen the Father"
If one needs a transcript of The character of God, they need not look further that to Christ Himself.
It really is that simple. Why complicate the issue??
...Animal..lets keep it simple folks. |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 750
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 - 1:28 pm: | |
I agree with trying to keep it simple Animal. But Christ is God. So telling us to look at God to understand God is redundant. |
Yenc
Registered user
Username: Yenc
Post Number: 391
Registered: 6-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 - 2:29 pm: | |
Isn't it true, then, that the whole of Scripture is a "transcript" of God? After all, it portrays His majesty, His love, His intolerance of and wrath at evil, His desire to forgive the repentent, His power, His creativity, His eternal existence, His embodiment as a human/divine being, . . . |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 752
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 - 2:36 pm: | |
If we look at the definition of transcript that Nowisee provided, then I might have to say that even Scripture is not a "transcript" of God but only descriptions of God.
But the whole of Scripture would tell us more about Who God is than any subset of Scripture could. |
Yenc
Registered user
Username: Yenc
Post Number: 392
Registered: 6-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 - 3:29 pm: | |
Perhaps it's the word "transcript" that is the problem. In that case, nothing but written words or a written copy of spoken words, can be a "transcript." Scripture is the only reliable "transcript" we have of God's actual words, albeit in translated form so that we can understand them in our own human languages. That said, don't God's words (or more accurately His "Word" in the form of the Bible) reveal better than anything else Who and what God is, His character, His will, His actions--past, present, and future, and all we NEED to know about Him? If not, what else is there? Jesus is not a transcript OF God--He IS God! The Bible is the only reliable record of God's character, His actions and His will. |
Paulcross
Registered user
Username: Paulcross
Post Number: 162
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 - 4:54 pm: | |
Some of my rambling thoughts…
Nowisee, I was also intrigued by the definition of “transcript” and chewed on that today as I returned home…
The question for me was whether or not the law [10Cs] is a complete and accurate portrayal of God’s character. I believe it is not complete as God continued to reveal more of Himself through the Incarnation and the scriptures. One example is the radical upgrade of our glimpse of God that we get when we compare the 10cs with Jesus’ sermon found in Matthew 5, 6 and 7. The 10cs are truncated, “bumper sticker” references to ethical behavior, I compared “thou shalt not kill” to Matthew 5:21-26. Jesus’ delivery has power to make us shake in our boots and admit that we are unworthy and receive His unbelievable generosity salvation [Luke 15:17-24]. Seeing God or His character more clearly does not enable us to do anything but drop our pretense of ”qualifying or being safe to save” and just receive His complete and completed salvation.
Because of the grandeur and greatness of God, all communications of who He is will be partial and “limited insight(s)”.
When we look to the Bible for a view of God we arrive at the most complete picture of Him, the larger the body of material we consult. So;
• Saying that the LAW [10Cs] reveals God is correct but we must admit it is a limited understanding that we can draw from this.
• If we say that the law [the writings of Moses and the prophets] reveals God we are also correct but the resulting image of who God is will be more complete and nuanced but we must still admit it is only limited understanding that we can draw.
• If we go further and say that the Old and New Testaments [Covenants] reveals God we are also correct and the resulting image of who God is will be much more complete and complex, we will have to admit that even is larger body of information limited and always made more difficult because of our human perspective and understanding.
To understand the importance of this “Law is the transcript of God’s character” statement to SDAism we need to keep in mind that [for Adventism] salvation stands firm or falls apart to the degree to which the individual complies with the Law of God. Under this kind of thinking the individual strives to incorporate the Law [10Cs] into his life “with God’s help”. The unsettling thing for SDAs is that the “believer” receives the “help of God” in this project to the degree to which the “believer” is already implementing the commandments of God. Making the Law the “equivalent of God” is meant to heighten the “stand alone” value of the Law [10Cs]. What happens though is that the individual’s relationship to the Law is constantly eclipsing God Himself. The Mosaic Law has a significant role [Galatians 3:21-24] but it is to drive us to Absolute and Total reliance on His goodness, His deeds and His Divinity. The Law makes us run into the arms of God and receive His adoption as His children [Galatians 4:4-7]
Thanks Ric_b, Nowisee, Colleen, Jrt, Jonvil, et al.
I muttered and sputtered today thinking about this only to find clarifying wisdom from all here when I returned home.
Paul Cross |
Animal
Registered user
Username: Animal
Post Number: 875
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 - 5:57 pm: | |
If the Son isnt the best representative of the Father, then what or who is?? We cant get caught up on the semantics of the word "transcript".
Again..If youve seen Me you have seen the Father.
Those arent the words of Animal. They are the words of Christ. You would think that His words count for something. Such a view isnt redundant Ric..sorry to disagree with you.
If you want to know or understand someone...why not go to that person and inquire of them such insight? By studying the life of Christ on earth, my love and understanding of the Father has grown immensely. If something works...stick with it I say.Who knows the Father better than the Son?
...Animal..keep your transcript and give me Jesus!! |
Hec
Registered user
Username: Hec
Post Number: 1650
Registered: 3-2009
| | Posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 - 6:03 pm: | |
Animal says: "By studying the life of Christ on earth, my love and understanding of the Father has grown immensely."
Studying where? The Bible? Doesn't that takes up back to the Bible?
Hec |
Animal
Registered user
Username: Animal
Post Number: 876
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 - 6:17 pm: | |
Correct Hec..the bible tells us the story of Jesus..who is God.
Really is that simple. But humans like to complicate the truth. The truth needs to be simple so others can understand it and make a decision for Christ...sigh.
...Animal..its ALL about Jesus!!! |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 753
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 - 7:11 pm: | |
Animal,
I resent the insinuation that I am saying Christ's words don't count for something. I value every word in Scripture as great blessing, but more importantly, as the 100 % accurate God-breathed truth. We read about God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) in His Word. We learn about God in what we read in that Word and through His indwelling Spirit.
In CONTEXT, Jesus said these words when the disciples asked Him to show the the Father. Since Jesus and the Father are One (rather than a couple of beings who mostly agree), He tells His disiples that in seeing Him, they are seeing the Father. We aren't in the position of seeing God face to face, as this scenario is predicated upon. We rely on reading about the Father and the Son. There is no reason to limit our understanding of God to only those accounts of Jesus' life. We have all of Scripture to tell us about God. |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 12329
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 - 7:42 pm: | |
Well, all this takes me back to my original thought about the identity of God. In the Great Controversy worldview, God is defined by the Law. In a biblical worldview, God is knowable, and we relate to Him as a Person, not as a tangible set of requirements.
Moreover, God is more than we can understand. We can know Him—but not all about Him. We can't "contain" Him in words, but we know words about Him: just, merciful, righteous, love, patient, grace-full, wrathful against sin, eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent—and so on.
And He has spoken to us through His Son in these last day! (Heb. 1:1-3).
I'm more and more aware that the Adventist conception of God is an affront to Him.
Colleen |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 756
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, March 05, 2011 - 7:51 pm: | |
Well said Colleen! Think about what type of God is fully described within the 10 commandments. That would be a very small and distant god. |
Indy4now
Registered user
Username: Indy4now
Post Number: 1018
Registered: 2-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 06, 2011 - 5:02 am: | |
The implications of this belief that the 10C's are a transcript of God's character are huge. Not only does it limit a person's belief about who God is, think about what this means in terms of a submitted life to God.
If a person believes that God's characater = the 10C's, then part of surrendering thier life to Christ would mean surrendering their life to the 10C's. To me, you might as well be praying to the stone tablets.
vivian |
Joyfulheart
Registered user
Username: Joyfulheart
Post Number: 813
Registered: 10-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, March 06, 2011 - 5:59 am: | |
And you know, it is possible to obey the ten commandments without ever having or showing love. Love is not an absence of wrong, but a commitment toward the other person's good.
God's main attribute is love. |
Indy4now
Registered user
Username: Indy4now
Post Number: 1019
Registered: 2-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 06, 2011 - 7:37 am: | |
... God's main attribute of love was demonstrated at the cross! |
Joyfulheart
Registered user
Username: Joyfulheart
Post Number: 814
Registered: 10-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, March 06, 2011 - 11:08 am: | |
Amen. |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 12331
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 06, 2011 - 10:37 pm: | |
I totally agree.
Colleen |
Pnoga
Registered user
Username: Pnoga
Post Number: 453
Registered: 1-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 12:27 pm: | |
In Romans 5:20 Paul states that the Law came along to multiply THE TRESPASS, But where sin multiplied, grace multiplied even more. Sin reigned in Death, the trepass that brought forth death was the one and only Trespass commited by Adam. In Gen 3 God said "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree which I commanded you not to eat" God said to Adam THE DAY you eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil you will surely Die. The serpent deceived Eve and said that they would not die, but be like God, knowing good and evil and obtaining wisdom, and she ate and gave to her husband who was with her. Romans 5 contrasts between the first Adam and the second whom is Christ. So the law came along to increase the trespass which is the desire to be like God and knowing good and evil and obtaining wisdom. Paul said that when the commandment came He died, and it slew him. He also states that the power of sin is the law. I'm sorry folks but the law equals death to us not life, that is Satan's lie that if we keep the law we will not die and we would be like God knowing good and evil and obtain wisdom, sounds familiar when others tell you that you must keep the 10 Cs in order to obtain salvation doesn't it? The Gospel is the tree of life, we can eat from it freely and learn from God by His Spirit and good Grace. The tree of knowlege/law is all about our desire to earn or be like God, it is our works which only should kill us and reveal our nakedness before God, we cannot attempt to cover our nakedness with the very leaves of the law which revealed our nakedness as Adam and Eve had tried. Only God can cloth us with His Mercy Love and Grace. Remember Adam and Eve were naked before the tree of knowledge and had no shame. God is merciful, though we are sinful God allows us to approach Him without shame through the robes of Jesus Christ's righteousness.
Paul |
|
