| Author | Message | ||
| Martinc Registered user Username: Martinc Post Number: 88 Registered: 9-2006 |
At Friday night Bible study with FAF, one of our friends asked about Jesus' resurrection, whether or not he laid aside his divine attributes. Someone asked if he raised himself from the dead, and quoted this statement about his resurrection, "Son of God, come forth, thy father calls thee." This statement is presented as evidence that Jesus laid aside his divine power when he became human, and depended upon his Father for his supernatural abilities, including rising from the dead. The quote is often attributed to the Bible. Several of us were unsure, so I checked all four gospels, and did not find it there. Actually, it is from Desire of Ages, Chapter 81, and it is not in the Bible. Even though Ellen White did not put it in quotes, many Adventists (and former Adventists) believe that it is biblical. The extra little details added by Ellen White seem to blend in so naturally with the biblical narrative. Matthew 28 merely states that the angel from heaven rolled the stone away and sat on it. Then we have the words of our Lord, "For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again." John 10:17,18 | ||
| Angelcat Registered user Username: Angelcat Post Number: 108 Registered: 11-2008 |
Wow. I always assumed that was in the Bible. Didn't know it was EGW. | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 2674 Registered: 10-2004  |
Wow, I didn't know that she taught that an angel resurrected JESUS! (Or at least, I had forgotten.) Wow, I am getting this really sick feeling reading that EGW quote--how blasphemous. Talk about "worship of angels"! Another passage where Jesus says that He will resurrect Himself is in John chapter 2:
And notice that Jesus said that this was the sign of His authority--the sign which Adventism denies. Jeremy | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 6748 Registered: 3-2004  |
I read those verses in John 10 not to long ago and it hit me. Jesus laid down his life and picked it up again Himself. He did not need any help. What an awesome God. Diana L | ||
| 8thday Registered user Username: 8thday Post Number: 828 Registered: 11-2007  |
Okay - how does all this fit in? (verses below) I think I understand what you are saying - but I found several more texts like the one below that speak of the Father raising the Son. Just wondering how this all fits together. Maybe this goes beyond what I am able to understand even about the Trinity - but them all being One - Jesus was in the Father raising Himself? I don't think it's unbiblical to speak of it this way (Father raising the Son), since Paul does in several places, but what egw implies when she says that, the way she words it - is loaded with much more - esp. with the Arian background. Also hate that she writes it like a quote - putting words into the mouth of God in an event that the Bible does not reveal the details about. I abhor all the extra-biblical "information" she slips in. That's what takes so long to sift out of our brains. Eph 1:19 and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might Eph 1:20 that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, Eph 1:21 far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. Eph 1:22 And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, Eph 1:23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all. Gal 1:1 Paul, an apostle--not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead-- (Message edited by 8thday on April 08, 2009) | ||
| Martinc Registered user Username: Martinc Post Number: 89 Registered: 9-2006 |
Here is the Desire of Ages quote. Like you said, Jeremy, this angel is "the mightiest of the Lord's host," and is exalted far beyond what is stated in scripture. "...The face they look upon is not the face of mortal warrior; it is the face of the mightiest of the Lord's host. This messenger is he who fills the position from which Satan fell. It is he who on the hills of Bethlehem proclaimed Christ's birth. The earth trembles at his approach, the hosts of darkness flee, and as he rolls away the stone, heaven seems to come down to the earth. The soldiers see him removing the stone as he would a pebble, and hear him cry, Son of God, come forth; Thy Father calls Thee. They see Jesus come forth from the grave, and hear Him proclaim over the rent sepulcher, "I am the resurrection, and the life." As He comes forth in majesty and glory, the angel host bow low in adoration before the Redeemer, and welcome Him with songs of praise. {DA 779, 780} She quotes Him saying, "I am the resurrection and the life," yet in her story, he needed to be called out by Satan's replacement. Here's the record from Matthew: "And behold, a severe earthquake had occurred, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it. And his appearance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow. The guards shook for fear of him and became like dead men. The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified. 'He is not here, for He has risen, just as He said.'" Matthew 28:2-6 Here is Mark: "They were saying to one another, 'Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance of the tomb?' Looking up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away, although it was extremely large. Entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting at the right, wearing a white robe; and they were amazed. And he said to them, 'Do not be amazed; you are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who has been crucified. He has risen; He is not here; behold, here is the place where they laid Him.'" Mark 16:3-6 Luke: "And they found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. While they were perplexed about this, behold, two men suddenly stood near them in dazzling clothing; and as the women were terrified and bowed their faces to the ground, the men said to them, 'Why do you seek the living One among the dead? He is not here, but He has risen. Remember how He spoke to you while He was still in Galilee...'" Luke 24:2-6 And my favorite in John: "But Mary was standing outside the tomb weeping; and so, as she wept, she stooped and looked into the tomb; and she saw two angels in white sitting, one at the head and one at the feet, where the body of Jesus had been lying. And they said to her, 'Woman, why are you weeping?' She said to them, 'Because they have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid Him.' When she had said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, and did not know that it was Jesus. Jesus said to her, 'Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you seeking?' Supposing Him to be the gardener, she said to Him, 'Sir, if you have carried Him away, tell me where you have laid Him, and I will take Him away.' Jesus said to her, 'Mary!'" John 20:11-16 | ||
| 8thday Registered user Username: 8thday Post Number: 830 Registered: 11-2007 |
Okay, missed the angel part there! ugh. unbelievable!! (Still don't know how to fit it all together though, between John and Paul.) Also, the SOTD doctrine really denies his being God because to them being dead is basically to not exist. | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 2676 Registered: 10-2004 |
Sondra, There is no contradiction between what Jesus said and what Paul wrote, since Jesus and the Father are the same God (one in being/substance/essence). If you've seen Jesus, you've seen the Father. The Son is in the Father, and the Father is in the Son. When Jesus does something, it is the Father doing it. (See John 14:6-11.) Also, Jesus says: "whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner." (John 5:19 NASB.) So, when Paul says that the Father raised Jesus from the dead, we can know that Jesus raised Himself from the dead! There is only one, indivisible God.  Jeremy | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 35 Registered: 3-2009 |
Jeremy, This sounds like you are saying that there is one God with different names rather than one God in three persons. Of course, I can't talk about this because I don't understand how to explain on God, three persons. Hec | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 2677 Registered: 10-2004 |
Hec, No, that is not what I am saying. I am just saying what those referenced Scriptures say. God is one simple Being who exists as three distinct, but not separate, persons. Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on April 08, 2009) | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 9642 Registered: 12-2003  |
Oh, my goodness! This "angel" piece of the puzzle had not hit me before! I remember feeling vaguely confused when the person at FAF quoted "Come forth! Thy Father calls thee..." but I didn't deal with it because I knew we needed the texts that showed Jesus had the power to raise Himself. This is most unbelievable--and this is one of the subtle but HUGELY pervasive heresies rampant among Adventists. No angel called Jesus to life--not even an angel bringing the Father's summons. Jesus rose to life by the inherent power of God that was in Him. Moreover, I'm stunned by the reference to this "resurrecting angel" being Satan's replacement! Oh, my goodness—there is so much heresy and nonsense in the foundational mishmash of my early training! I totally didn't remember this angel thing—the Bible is quite clear that the angel at the tomb was a stone-roller and a messenger to the faithful who came looking. And speaking of "messenger"—remember Ellen said she was more than a prophet? Remember what she did call herself? A "messenger". That is the biblical title for an angel. (See Hebrews 1:14.) Colleen | ||
| Akweavers Registered user Username: Akweavers Post Number: 124 Registered: 8-2008 |
On Ellen White and the angels, even before we left the sda my oldest son said to me many times, "she acts like she worships angels or is obsessed with them" I would just give some..oh no she isn't answer and change the subject. Now I am thinking, "out of the mouth of babes" | ||
| Martinc Registered user Username: Martinc Post Number: 90 Registered: 9-2006 |
She certainly had much to say about angels as Jesus, and Jesus as an angel. According to EGW, Jesus appears as an angel many times in the Bible, and is the archangel, Michael. Many of the references to the "Angel of the Lord" refer to Jesus in pre-incarnate form, appearing to Israel: "...an angel of God, having first appeared at Gilgal, revealed himself to the congregation at Shiloh. . . . This angel, the same that appeared to Joshua at the taking of Jericho, was no less a personage than the Son of God." {TA 113.1} Joshua the High Priest in Zech.: "And the Angel of the Lord stood by [Jesus their Redeemer]. And the Angel of the Lord protested unto Joshua, saying..." TM 40 Gideon: Suddenly the "Angel of the Lord" appeared and addressed him with the words, "Jehovah is with thee, thou mighty man of valor. The angel had veiled the divine glory of His presence, but it was no other than Christ, the Son of God." {TA 113} EGW also says Gabriel is just below the Son in the heavenly hierarchy: "Wonderful thought--that the angel who stands next in honor to the Son of God is the one chosen to open the purposes of God to sinful men." DA 99. This strongly implies that the Son is not at the top of the hierarchy. | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1846 Registered: 10-2002  |
I think this phrase shows the basic imagery EGW was working with here -- which was the SDA doctrine of soul sleep. The "come forth" is in the manner that Christ actually spoke to Lazarus and to other people when He was resurrecting them. At that time He had said they were "only sleeping", which Adventism took to include even their spirits (neverminding the case where it says about a little girl that "her spirit returned to her"). EGW/SDA put the same unbiblical "death of the spirit" onto Jesus Christ and confidently assumed that He was sleeping -- all His body, soul and spirit. Thus, in that logic He would need someone to "wake Him up", so to speak. That duty apparently fell upon some angel. I don't know exactly why EGW chose to have an angel do this rather than the Father Himself say "Wake up, My Son" or something like that. What it inadvertantely does, like Jeremy & others said, is to put Jesus at a level lower than the angels. This, however, isn't as directly blasphemous as the SOTD problem, because Hebrews 2 says that in becoming human Jesus was made lower than the angels (we may distinguish this as a voluntary self-humbling, however). I think the more blasphemous thing here is to suggest that Jesus' spirit died when His body died -- something that directly contradicts 1st Peter where he says that Jesus, while dead, went "through the Spirit" to preach the gospel in Hades. Unless, of course, EGW/SDA wants to argue that the angel itself did the resurrecting and not the Father through the angel. I think the EGW quote could be read that way, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt because shoot, I don't think EGW or the other "pioneers" knew half of what they were talking about most of the time. They certainly didn't think logically about most of the logical extentions of beliefs they were playing around with & adopting. I think they were BS-ing a lot! (Sorry for the language, Colleen & Richard! I can't think of any other word, however, to describe the process by which the pioneers "invented truth" -- I know it well, because I did the same thing while I was Adventist! I think it's part of the Adventist heritage, so to speak, because every Adventist learns how to do it simply because what he/she has been taught does not line up with Scripture, so he/she must begin to think creatively in order to arrive at "truth" which will reconcile the disconnect between Scripture and SDA truth). Oh, Jeremy & Sondra, I wanted to add to something you both said. There are verses that clearly show the Son had the power to raise Himself, and also that the Father rasied the Son, and so both are true. To that I want to just add that 1st Peter 3:19 says Jesus went to Hades "through the Spirit", and that Christ also offered Himself to God "through the eternal Spirit" (Heb.9:14). Apparently, as with most of (if not all of) God's actions, all of the Trinity was involved in the resurrection of Christ from the dead. And even further, in Hebrews 13:20, it says that the Father raised Christ from the dead "through the blood of the eternal covenant" -- that is, Christ's blood. Even the very blood of Christ raised Him from the dead! | ||
| 8thday Registered user Username: 8thday Post Number: 831 Registered: 11-2007 |
This is all very enlightening. The SOTD thing hit me really hard yesterday after I'd posted the first thing. I agree Ramone this is a worse problem than the angel issue - although that is bad enough in itself. (I NEVER remember hearing that as an sda btw). I am also remembering how we were taught that Jesus experienced the "second death" which no one has experienced yet, and only the lost will experience at their final destruction. I never understood the "more dead than dead" concept and if this was what Jesus took on for us, in or our place, then the "sleeping" state would not even apply to Him. He was dead all the way, as dead as dead can get.. Yeah, this is all really making sense to me now! ha. (not) I also agree they were making up alot of stuff as they went along. It's like the tangled web we weave when at first we practice to deceive (or however that goes). You start with one false assumption (like the IJ) and you have to bend and twist everything else to make it fit - and somehow, people believe the whole house of cards is a sound structure. Amazing. Thanks for all the input there! Very helpful! Sondra | ||
| Gcfrankie Registered user Username: Gcfrankie Post Number: 382 Registered: 1-2007 |
O-kay, I need to pick your brains. Didn't egw teach that Jesus and satan were angels and equals and that God adopted Jesus over satan and satan was jealous and fell from grace? I vaguely remember reading something to this effect. If this is what she wrote then I can see where she came up with the false teaching of Jesus being an angel and that it would take the angels to supposidly tell Jesus that God was calling him. Sick,sick,sick!!!! I read some of what she wrote but did not study her writings and I have a hard time remembering what she claimed. Gail | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 39 Registered: 3-2009 |
I don't know if this needs a different threat or it's OK here. So there it goes. Sondra says:
My sins require "the second death". We all experience "first death". (Except of course for those alive when Jesus returns.) If Jesus paid for my sins, doesn't it follows that he experienced "the second death"? Oh, my, I'm getting embarrassed! I was the one who at 16 used to debate pastors from other religions (JW's, Pentecostals, evangelicals) and win the debate for "the truth". And now, I don't know anything!! How more embarrassing can this get? | ||
| Jrt Registered user Username: Jrt Post Number: 286 Registered: 10-2008 |
Hec, I'm glad you asked the question! I had been skimming this thread and the question you asked popped up in my head. May I add to your question? Is "first death" and "second death" Adventist terms? Keri | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 6758 Registered: 3-2004 |
Hec, as SDAs we had all the anwers for any question. I really like it that now I do not have to have all the answers. It is good to say, "I do not know". Diana | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 9653 Registered: 12-2003 |
You know, these questions begin to make sense when we actually understand the definition of "death". According to the Bible, when Jesus died, his body died and went into the ground, but His spirit went to God. When Jesus raised Jarius's daughter and Lazarus, He made a point to say they were not dead but asleep. Well, how is "sleep" different from "death"? From our perspective, sleep is not permanent. We return to consciousness. So, what characterized "sleep", or the "first death"? When we look at Jesus, we see that at death, his spirit left his body. This is the definition of death as we know it today. The body and the spirit are separated. But this state is not "permanent". This is merely the first death. When Jesus was resurrected, His spirit returned to his body—which was a different kind of body. He received a spiritual, or glorified body (using Paul's description of resurrection in 1 Cor 15). When Jesus raised Lazarus and Jarius's daughter, their spirits and bodies also came back together—but they were not given glorified, or spiritual bodies. Rather, they were "resussitated". Jesus alone is the firstfruit or first born from the dead (Col 1:18, 1 Cor 15:20). They still had to die again. So what is the second death? Well, Jesus again is our "clue". Actually, Jesus experienced the effects of the second death while he hung on the cross and became sin, when His Father forsook Him and the whole earth turned dark in midday. Jesus experienced the "second death effect" while His body and His spirit were joined. Fast forward to Revelation 20. After the millennium, which is described in the first half of the chapter, we read that the wicked are resurrected for judgment. The righteous were resurrected at the beginning of the millennium and reigned with Christ 1,000 years. The wicked are raised at the end. What happens to them? They are judged and sent into the lake of fire reserved for the devil and his angels. Notice that the false prophet and the beast have already been in the lake of fire for the previous 1,000 years, having been thrown in at the end of Armaggedon before the start of the millennium at the end of Revelation 19. So, when the wicked are thrown in 1000 years later, the beast and the false prophet are already there. Notice also that the wicked are resurrected for punishment. Theirs is not merely a "spiritual" punishment. Moreover, there is nothing in the Bible to suggest that the resurrection bodies of the wicked are of a different nature than are the resurrection bodies of the righteous. Each is resurrected. We know from 1 Cor 15 that resurrection bodies are "spiritual bodies" and are related to our mortal bodies as plants are related to seeds. But we know that our resurrection bodies are immortal, and our bodies now are mortal, according to 1 Cor 15. Because there is nothing to suggest that the resurrection bodies of the wicked are different in nature from those of the righteous, we conclude that the difference between them and the saved is what happens to them. The righteous will be forever with the Lord. The wicked will be forever in the lake of fire, or in the outer darkness Peter describes. The second death, apparently, is the final separation of the human from God, the total inability of the person to be in relationship with the Father. Eternal isolation is the fate of the wicked—and it appears this final fate happens while the wicked have their bodies and spirits joined. They experience this final punishment as resurrected people. The first death, therefore, is temporary—and it is defined by the body and the spirit being separated—the body going to the ground, and the spirit going into God's keeping. The second death happens after the resurrection, when the resurrection bodies and spirits of the wicked are joined. They suffer in their resurrection bodies. Thus Jesus' experience on the cross illuminates this outcome: he suffered the effects of sin separating Him from the Father while his body and spirit were together; His death, when his spirit left his body, was temporary. His resurrection returned His spirit to His glorified body. And yes—"second death" is biblical. The end of Revelation 20 identifies the lake of fire as the second death. This is just my understanding of this at the present time...! Colleen |
