May 27th, By Joshua Lim Category: Featured Articles This a guest post by Joshua Lim. He spent a few years in college as a Baptist before moving back to a confessional Reformed denomination URCNA prior to entering seminary. He was received into full communion with the Catholic Church this year on April 21st, the feast day of St.
By Gary Patterson, August 3, The obvious answer to the question is yes. But unfortunately this answer does not address the real issues generally being raised when the question is asked. Hard by the west side of the Alamodome in San Antonio, where the meetings of the recent General Conference session were held, runs highway Interstate A steady stream of vehicles continued to rush by at the 60 mile per hour speed limit as posted on that highway.
If the session voted to change that speed limit to 45 miles per hour, it would have no effect on the traffic, given that such an action is not within the jurisdiction of the General Conference. This may seem to be a ridiculous comparison, but for all its seemingly foolishness, it gets at the heart of the issue by asking what really is within the jurisdiction of the General Conference.
The power vested in the Conference is not to be centered in one man, or two men, or six men; there is to be a council of men over the separate divisions. In the work of God no kingly authority is to be exercised by any human being, or by two or three.
But the statement regarding it being the highest authority on earth, used as it often is to impose control over the church, is at best disingenuous, and perhaps, misleading. Even if at times it may be true, this on again, off again coverage is clearly spotty over time, and the question arises as to when and how we determine it to be such an authority.
Authority and Inerrancy Being an authority does not convey inerrancy. That the General Conference in session can and does err in its judgement and actions is demonstrated by the issues of the session, which are still debated today over a century later.
In addition, some actions taken in subsequent years since that time are certainly not above question. To assume everything voted by the session is the will of God is a mammoth leap of reason, to say nothing of theology. Perhaps, rather than a ringing endorsement of its authority, the comment should be taken as an apology, stating that this institution, with all its human foibles, is the best that we have to work with at any given time.
Assuming that every action taken at the session is the will of God for the world church, what does such a stance say about those who voted against the action? Were those who in good conscience voted in opposition to a given action, thus voting against the will of God?
Clearly, many things voted at the session would not fall into the category of the will of God.
Such matters as voting to close discussion, or times of meetings, or adjournment would not generally be considered will of God issues. All this being the obvious case, it then needs to be determined just which things are in the jurisdiction of the General Conference and which are not.
Though the list is much longer than given here, yet a few examples will serve to illustrate the point, as delineated in GC Working Policy B 05, point 6. Different elements of organizational authority and responsibility are distributed among the various levels of denominational organization.
Thus each level of organization exercises a realm of final authority and responsibility that may have implications for other levels of organization. Though in the Roman Catholic system, the Pope may excommunicate individual members, in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, neither the General Conference in session nor any level of church governance, other than the local congregation, may do so.Nothing is "lock-tight provable," _all_ is _speculation_ for scholars, myself included.
I understand that Yahweh is an almagam of MANY gods and goddesses, Mesopotamian, Hittite, Syrian, Phoenician, Egyptian, and Canaanite. The Bible is introduced including basic explanation of the books of the Bible, Old Testament manuscript evidence, the dead sea scrolls, ancient New Testament manuscripts, and the testimony of the Qur'an and Biblical archeology.
The concepts of abrogation of divine revelation, and satanic inspiration are refuted as unbiblical. The legendary time-span in which the Hebrews were slaves in Egypt is variously given. Genesis states that it was years, presented in the guise of prophecy from Yahweh's own mouth.
While in Exodus the narrator states that it was years. In Defense of the Bible gathers exceptional articles by accomplished scholars (Paul Copan, William A. Dembski, Mary Jo Sharp, Darrell L. Bock, etc.), addressing and responding to all of the major contemporary challenges to the divine inspiration and authority of Scripture.
Bible's OT and NT declare Jesus was never crucified: Psalm Jesus and his mother, Mary, both thanked GOD Almighty for saving Jesus from harm and death.; Isaiah and Psalm indisputably confirm that Jesus never got crucified.
Both Jesus and satan even referenced them in the NT during their conversation. Book of Mormon Problems. LDS Church members are taught that the Book of Mormon (BOM) is scripture, as well as a true record of the inhabitants of the Americas from about BC to AD.