| Author | Message | ||
| Freedom55 Registered user Username: Freedom55 Post Number: 30 Registered: 3-2008 |
I came across this news release from the Adventist News Network of an action taken by church officials at their recent annual council to accept the forthcoming publication of the Andrews Study Bible: _______________________ "Also on the docket this week was a presentation on the forthcoming Andrews Study Bible, which delegates moved to accept. Published at Andrews University Press, the Bible is designed to "enrich the serious, thoughtful study" of Scripture, said Niels-Erik Andreasen, president of Adventist-owned Andrews University. An international team of Bible scholars worked to make the study Bible "academically credible, theologically sound and practically useful," Andreasen told delegates. Expected to be available next year, the Andrews Study Bible will include a reference system linking many of the Bible's themes, such as Sabbath observance and the Second Coming." ____________________________ I don't know how academically credible this bible will be. It doesn't say what version they will be using. And theologically sound??? If they are linking Sabbath observance with the 2nd coming, then they have already departed from the concept of theologically sound. I hadn't heard about this before. Anybody else? | ||
| Pegg Registered user Username: Pegg Post Number: 460 Registered: 2-2006 |
This is interesting, Freedom. We have been talking about the Andrews Study Bible over in the other section. The release you've posted has tweaked my interest. Seems it's going to have official, official blessing. Andreasen says,"An international team of Bible scholars worked to make the study Bible "academically credible, theologically sound and practically useful." I would like to know if this includes any non-SDA scholars. Can Anyone Find Access To A List? Pegg  (Message edited by pegg on October 15, 2009) | ||
| Freedom55 Registered user Username: Freedom55 Post Number: 32 Registered: 3-2008 |
Thanks for the link to the previous discussion Pegg. This Bible is just going to be another source of confusion to an already confusing world. I received a KJV bible with HMS Richards study guides at the back of the Bible when I was a teenager. At that time it did affect me since it gave credibility to the studies. After all they were in the Bible! I'm afraid the same will happen here. | ||
| Believer247 Registered user Username: Believer247 Post Number: 63 Registered: 3-2009 |
Sounds like this bible will have study notes and comments at the bottom of the page, similar to the Nelson Study Bible, except the notes and comments will be EGW quotes and SDA theolgian opinion. I wonder if this has come about due to so many of us formers studying our way out of Adventism by reading the Bible only and realizing that SDA doctrines aren't biblical. They may be thinking that if a person has this Bible, they won't see the difference because of the SDA comments & quotes in the study notes. This would also be another subtle way of indoctinating new converts, by reinforcing the unbiblical doctrines in the study notes. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 10512 Registered: 12-2003  |
Besides the obvious purpose of helping Adventists to resolve their cognitive dissonance when they read the Bible, it's a way to have a "regular" Bible they can give as a "freebie" to those who attend their evangelistic meetings. Those poor people will not know the study notes are heretical and will twist the meanings of the clear words of the Bible to mean something they don't really mean. Colleen | ||
| Freedom55 Registered user Username: Freedom55 Post Number: 33 Registered: 3-2008 |
What bothers me is that while there have been other Bibles in the past with Adventist study guides (such as the HMS Richards Bible) or with Adventist interpretations (like the Clear Word Bible and I shudder as I mention it), I believe this will be the first Bible that will be officially endorsed by the Adventist church. It was voted to accept the Andrews Study Bible at the Adventist Church Annual Council held last week at the General Conference and I understand it is intended to be unveiled at the upcoming 2010 General Conference Session. This is troubling and scary. Not only will it be an official endorsement of the interpretive study notes, but it will also be an official endorsement of the version of the bible that will be used. From all appearances, it looks like the version that will be used will be the NKJV. And as we should all know, the KJV was based on much later unreliable manuscripts. But I have found that conservative Adventists and evangelists will only use the KJV or the NKJV because it is the only version that will support their unique doctrines. They don't like the newer translations, viewing them with disdain because they dare to translate their pet verses differently. Just look at Dan 8:14, Dan 9, Acts 3:19, Hebrews 6:19; Hebrews 9:12 & 24. I have even heard it suggested somewhere that the doctrine of the Investigative Judgment may never have seen the light of day if the pioneers had used a different translation of Dan 8:14 other than the KJV which unfortunately used the word "cleansed". So this is what really bothers me. Just look at how far reaching the Clear Word Bible had without official endorsement. Maybe this is an indication of how desparate the Adventist Church is to maintain its unique doctrines? Just wondering. | ||
| Christo Registered user Username: Christo Post Number: 172 Registered: 2-2008 |
Who is publishing this bible? Chris | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 7617 Registered: 3-2004  |
Andrews University Press according to the first post here. Diana L | ||
| Gcfrankie Registered user Username: Gcfrankie Post Number: 623 Registered: 1-2007 |
The only other bible I know of as being offically adopted by sda is the KJV with egw footnotes. What I find ironic about this is that the sda used to condemn the jws for having their own bible claiming it was full of errors because of their beliefs inner mixed in it and now they are doing the same thing with this new bible. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Gail | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 7620 Registered: 3-2004 |
We know the SDAs are mixing their beliefs with the Bible. The problem is that they do not see that. Like the clear word book, they do not see how it has changed what the Bible really says. That is why we need to pray for them. They just plain have unbiblical beliefs. It cannot be half and half. It is all or nothing. Jesus or EGW. As for me and my house we will follow Jesus. Diana L | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 10518 Registered: 12-2003 |
Yes, they are about double-speak and denial and deception. They have arguments to support every belief and to refute every criticism. And their arguments are masterpieces of deceptive words mulched together to sound plausible and to be hard to tease apart. For example, Dwight Nelson's sermon last week on the "two goats"--the Day of Atonement's sacrifice and the scapegoat. He defended the scapegoat as being Satan, but he used his words in such a way as to make it sound plausible if you didn't really know Scripture. One of his core arguments was that God will punish Satan for being the cause of all of our sins. No one but Satan is to blame for the sin of the universe, and no one but Satan will be punished for being that cause. Hence he'll take the sins of the saved on himself and be punished for his foundational causing of sin. The problem with this argument is that Satan is not held responsible for human sin. He's responsible for his own sin. Adam is held responsible for human sin. That's why Jesus had to be human; He had to die a human death in order to pay for human sin. He had to "earn" the right to be the new head of the human race of the saved. Moreover, God Himself took responsibility for the sin in the universe. Satan is not responsible; as the Creator, God took the responsibility. That is why Jesus, the eternal, sovereign second person of the Trinity, came to bear the penalty for human sin. Only a human's death could pay for human sin, and only God could carry the responsibility for the sin of His own creation. Dwight's sermon (and Adventist reasoning) misses entirely the fact that Satan is never held responsible or accused of causing human sin. Oh yes, he deceived Eve, and God cursed the serpent and declared Eve's seed would crush his head. But Satan is not responsible for Adam and Eve's sin. Adam is held responsible for humanity's sin (read Romans 5), and Jesus took the responsibility and experienced the punishment for human sin. Satan in no way is punished for causing our sin. Jesus took the responsibility for our sin. Colleen | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3060 Registered: 10-2004  |
And another problem with that argument is that they don't teach that satan bears the sins of the wicked--just the righteous. Why just the righteous, if he "caused" everyone to commit their sins, and is being punished for "causing" sin? Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on October 18, 2009) | ||
| Skeeter Registered user Username: Skeeter Post Number: 409 Registered: 12-2007 |
Colleen, I had never really thought about it that way.. " Satan is not held responsible for human sin. He's responsible for his own sin. Adam is held responsible for human sin. That's why Jesus had to be human; He had to die a human death in order to pay for human sin. He had to "earn" the right to be the new head of the human race of the saved." So, while Satan was the first to sin( in Heaven)...and he put that temptation out there to Adam and Eve with his lies.... he was not the first HUMAN to sin. Adam and Eve were the first humans to make a "CHOICE" to sin. Hmmmmm... wondering... why was Adam more blamed than Eve when it was she that gave the forbidden fruit to Adam ? Was it because Adam was supposed to be head of his household and he should have known better and Eve was just a dumb female ? I know SDA's teach that Eve wandered from Adams side and that is why she was tempted and ate that she later offered the fruit to him and he accepted it from her... I believed that for years as a SDA... But when I realized Satan tempted Eve and that she ate and then gave to Adam "who was with her" .. makes me wonder why Adam didnt slap that fruit out of her hand before she could take a bite... did he just stand there and watch her eat it and then willingly eat it himself because he couldnt stand the thought of losing Eve ? Since Adam and Eve were both right there... why does the Bible say Satan tempted Eve instead of that he tempted them both ? Maybe he was talking directly to Eve, but apparently Adam was standing there.... why didnt he do something... drag her off by her hair if he had to .. ? But apparently he didnt do anything to stop Eve from eating... is that why Adam is blamed more so than Eve ? Just wandering wonderings... | ||
| Skeeter Registered user Username: Skeeter Post Number: 410 Registered: 12-2007 |
So no more using the excuse "the devil made me do it" (sigh) it was kinda nice being able to blame someone other than myself for my poor judgment, poor decisions. :-{ Satan sinned and a third of the Angels rebelled and were cast out of Heaven with him ? or is that number just another SDAism ? I have never been able to understand how the "Angels" after seeing how Satan rebelled agains God,,, how they could choose to follow Satan ? Heaven is supposed to be a place of perfection... such a great mystery how out of "perfection" there could arise such evil ! It is a good thing we will have all eternity to learn all the answers to all those questions.. | ||
| Pnoga Registered user Username: Pnoga Post Number: 300 Registered: 1-2007  |
I'm going to get me one of these bad boys, the winter is approaching and soon I will be burning the 'ol fire pit in my backyard, good fuel for the flames. ;) Paul | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 7624 Registered: 3-2004 |
Very expensive fire starters, plus you will be adding to the SDA coffers by buying the book. Just a thought!!! Diana L | ||
| Pnoga Registered user Username: Pnoga Post Number: 301 Registered: 1-2007 |
Oh trust me Diana I was only kidding, I wouldn't want to light strange fire before my Lord. I wouldn't dare waste my money and support their cause. Paul | ||
| Seekr777 Registered user Username: Seekr777 Post Number: 798 Registered: 1-2003  |
I'm realizing as I read the issues discussed here that I must be VERY careful in what I say as I express my comments of "the book" This Book is still the Word of God. I might disagree with the notes and help articles that are included but the Bible is still the Bible. Many churches, preachers, etc. adopt a specific translation as their primary translation. I know I was in a church several Sundays ago which had the NKJV as the Bible which was placed in the pews for all to use. Usually this is so the minister can refer to page number as well as verse reference for new/young believers who are not that familiar with the Bible. This new Bible is not like the JW Bible which is a distinct new translation (or the Clear Word, which is NOT a faithful translation). This Bible (NKJV) is a commonly used translation in many different churches. I understand the criticism of the notes included but please lets make that a separate issue. Maybe God can through His Spirit open eyes with the notes written along with the actual Word of God so close together ! ! He is Lord and I must always remember His claim on me as His son. Richard rtruitt@mac.com . | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 10523 Registered: 12-2003 |
Francie, Genesis 2 explains that God instructed Adam, before Eve's creation, about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Adam was the one put in charge of creation; he named the animals‚he even named Eve, as recorded in Genesis 3—right after the story of the fall. Adam was the head of the human race. He was created out of the material of the earth, the only human fashioned from the earth. He was put in charge of the earth and its creation. Eve was created from his rib to be his helper, as the account says. It was Adam's responsibility to instruct Eve regarding all that God had told him. He was created as the head of the human race; Eve was his helper. Adam was entrusted with teaching Eve what God had instructed him. In 1 Timothy 1 Paul tells us that it was Eve who was deceived. Adam sinned with his eyes wide open. He could have—and indeed was responsible—for stopping Eve. But he didn't—and God held him responsible for the sin of the human race (See 1 Cor 15; as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. Romans 5 also is explicit that Adan is the one responsible for our innate spiritual death.) God showed Eve grace; He promised that through her "seed" the serpent would be crushed. He punished her—childbirth would be painful, and she would desire her husband (the Hebrew word there means "to control" or dominate or possess), but he would rule over her. But He extended grace; Adam's name for her was Eve—"the mother of all the living". The "living" are not just all those on the earth. The "living" are the spiritually living. Through Eve the race would receive the holy Seed, and the saved would trace their inheritance through her. Adam, however, is not the "father of the living". He is our forebear who gives us death. Jesus is the "second Adam". Our sin, according to Scripture, is bequeathed to us through Adam, not Eve. Jesus came to be the new Father of the living. Jesus Himself is the son of Mary—and the Son of God. He did not inherit the spiritual death bequeathed through Adam. His only Father is God. When we are born again and filled with the Holy Spirit and Jesus' own resurrection life, we move from being "in Adam" to being "in Christ". We have a new identity, a new parentage. We are still sons and daughters of Eve—but we are no longer considered, in God's eyes, children of Adam. We are children of God. Adam himself had to repent and believe God. God's punishment to Adam was to earn his living by the sweat of his brow--but God cursed the earth. The very elemental substance from which Adam was made was cursed. All humanity was thus cursed. The very essence of our physical being was cursed. We have no choice but to be born cursed. In Christ, however, we are redeemed, because Jesus became our curse (Gal 3:13) and became our sin (2 Cor 5:21). He redeems our natural sinfulness and curse and gives us His own Spirit and life, and we become born of God. According to the Genesis account, Eve was the one Satan deceived. She is the one who engaged in conversation with the serpent. Instead of obeying the word of God, she discussed it and rationalized it with a very clever arguer. Satan deceived her with clever words. (Sound familiar?) Adam was not deceived. He accepted Eve's fruit, and apparently he saw Eve engage in the conversation. But, as Gary has explained it in the past, Adam watched her, apparently with some sort-of paralyzed fascination much as many men today watch passively while their women beguile them into sin. Adam is responsible because ALL humanity came from him—even Eve. He was responsible for the spiritual instruction and protection of his wife who was made from his own rib. When we look at this account in Genesis, the passage in Ephesians 5 about husbands being the "head" of the wife as Christ is head of the church makes more and more sense. It's not a "put the woman down" situation. Rather, is is an example of God's own protection of and provision for the church through the sacrificial love of Jesus. God gave Eve grace right at the time of her sin and promised that she would bear the godly Seed through whom creation would be redeemed. Adam received the curse of his foundational essence which meant his entire life would be spent toiling for his own life. In Jesus this compounded curse is removed, and we are set free to live as God's children and heirs. Colleen | ||
| Skeeter Registered user Username: Skeeter Post Number: 413 Registered: 12-2007 |
Colleen, Thank you for explaining so beautifully ! I am constantly amazed at what I learn on this forum . Sometimes there will be days when it seems I read posts here and nothing much happens, but then I read a post like yours and it stirs up feelings inside and it's like I get this "AHA !" moment bringing peace to my heart and tears to my eyes. ((( Colleen ))) Francie |
