Comment on Ricardo Graham clarifies LSU Board releases by Rich Constantinescu.
If you build a house and you own the house then it is my your house. What happens in your house is my your say-so. For this house, the owners of the house (constituents and SDA church) have unclearly defined what will be done.
The author makes the rules, called authority. I should take-over build another house if I don’t like your authority so I can make my own rules.
You’ll ask me to stay show me the door if I don’t.
The Bible says, “as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.” Joshua 24:15
God bless,
Rich
Table of Contents
Rich Constantinescu Also Commented
Ricardo Graham clarifies LSU Board releases
Jesus rejected the idea of earthly empire. Since Jesus didn’t provide this, the Jewish people forsook, rejected and killed him. (John 6:15, 66; John 18:36)
Mark 10:42 speaks of lordship and authority exercised by Gentile nations. (Cf. Daniel 7.) It was, “You don’t like the way we do things then we will overcome, occupy and if you resist, kill you.” Cf. Josephus.
“But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship (κατακυÏιευÌω) over them; and their great ones exercise authority (κατεξουσιαÌζω) upon them.” Mark 10:42
“κατακυÏιευÌω (Katakoreeyoo): lord against, that is, control, subjugate: – exercise dominion over (lordship), be lord over, overcome.” Strong
“κατεξουσιαÌζω (Katexsooseazdo): to have (wield) full privilege over:” Strong
Jesus’ reference in Mark 10:42 was to pagan government and directed to the disciples’ attitude representative of the Jewish nation wanting to physically destroy their enemies. (John 6:15, 66)
“And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.” Luke 9:54-55
Such ideology is falsely projected on those who request transparency and fidelity. Teachers should follow Jesus’ words and submit to duly constituted authority.
Ultimate authority is with God. However, duly constituted authority is God-ordained. (Cf. Romans 13.) Stealing and lying is stealing and lying. It is unacceptable. If someone pays for Adventist education at a school which carries the name “Seventh-day Adventist” duly constituted, they should receive the same.
Those that discourage others talking about this should themselves keep silence and logically follow their own advice. If the Holy Spirit is on their side who thinks everyone should “hush”, they may be quiet and let God tell the ones speaking about it.
God bless!
Rich
Ricardo Graham clarifies LSU Board releases
God deserves worship on the basis of His authorship of us in six days.
(Cf. Revelation 4:11; Revelation 14:7; Exodus 20:11; Psalms 95:6; Psalms 96:5; Psalms 100:3; Isaiah 40:25-26; Isaiah 45:18)
Unwise for the authored to assume the stance of the first rebel in denying their Author. (Cf. Isaiah 14:14)
In response to the original question often repeated in this forum, “has God said?” the answer is quite clear. Yes, God said. Genesis 3:4
Recent Comments by Rich Constantinescu
Intelligent Design – Science or Religion?
Thank you Sean. Very helpful information. Praise God.
God bless,
Rich
The Reptile King
Kent debuted here at ET two years ago with proclamations that there was no evidence that the theory of evolution was taught at LSU but since has modified his evolution-free period to the last 1.5 years. He has threatened to leave time after time but never did. Nor has he stopped reminding us us he is persecuted and misunderstood.
Kent: “Bob, you’ve hardened your heart and gone mad. You wouldn’t know “truth†if it smacked you between the eyes. You’ve proven to every reader here that you are not “in Christ.†Turn off your computer, throw your modem in garbage, and save your soul before it is consumed with hatred and falsehood.â€
Rich then noted that Kent shouldn’t be too upset about people not taking him as seriously as he would like because Kent came here pretending to not be an Adventist but it turned out he actually was an Adventist. The kind that doesn’t see much to worry about administration using vulgarity, drinking alcohol and evading authority albeit.
It is a little amusing that an observation that Kent tried to make readers think he wasn’t Adventist and the unacceptable tone of his ad hominem post towards Bob (not like the posts he harvested of Bob’s) is met by more ad hominem and – of all things – an accusation of ad hominem. I cannot think of many better text-book examples of projection.
However, credit where credit is due. Kent is persevering and he did let Bob keep his computer even though he made him throw away his modem. A nice scholar-to-scholar gesture or perhaps a typo yet short of the camaraderie we were waiting to see.
God bless,
Rich
The Reptile King
Kent apparently does not realize he lost some of us when he stormed in to Educate Truth two years ago ranting and waving, “If I were an Adventist, I’d be ashamed to be one of you!” The fuss Kent put up made some here ask why an outsider was so upset about the Adventists not “representing”? When the shame game didn’t work Kent stormed out, stormed in, stormed out again (and again).
Some of us wondered, why is Kent so interested? Is he for lack of a better strategy trying to corner ET in any way he can in this case by shame and blame? Is he playing whatever side he can to get his advantage? Some of us asked directly if he was after all an Adventist, to which Kent irately responded, “as to the question of whether I’m an Adventist or not … it makes no difference.”
We have been for some time more than beginning to see the truth in that statement. Therefore Kent truly should not be upset when some people don’t take seriously his apology of, “I also am a Creationist.” Trust is built and the foundation is missing.
Here is recent gem towards a “fellow creationist”:
Kent says, “Bob, you’ve hardened your heart and gone mad. You wouldn’t know “truth†if it smacked you between the eyes. You’ve proven to every reader here that you are not “in Christ.†Turn off your computer, throw your modem in garbage, and save your soul before it is consumed with hatred and falsehood.”
Hatred indeed. Those who stand for what they believe are, understandably, a mystery and great cause of perplexity to Kent usually worth many hours of his insight and forethought on his computer and modem. That last post apparently is not the fruit of taking enough time to cover one’s tracks.
God bless,
Rich
The Reptile King
Kent, I was not primarily quoting EGW as an authority. I only noted that if someone quotes one portion of EGW writings as authoritative about the supposed disvalue of the “deductions of science” being evidence for or against a point of faith, they should be free to accept other parts of her writings which make it clear that science is not opposed to God’s Word. I do agree that the conflict is not between science and faith but only with the deductions of science and the conclusions of the natural, rebellious, un-renewed heart. EGW never opposed science. She opposed as the Bible says, “science falsely so-called.”
Our colleges all have students from non-Adventist persuasions. The world is invited to and attends all our other schools. They have a right to know what we are teaching if we are bearing false witness.
God bless,
Rich
The Reptile King
Kent, you either missed or ignored the point. The point was and is, if someone would take EGW as saying “deductions of science” means there is no false science, just one true science that is totally contradictory to the Bible and we must choose to live in blind faith without it that is wholly inconsistent with the other many statements by the same author who talks about true science revealing God whereas false science doesn’t.
Your knot is easily untied. An enemy has done this.
God bless,
Rich