This fact is seen in the statement of Jesus re the resurrection of Lazarus….”I thank thee that thou hast heard me”..John 11:41…”but because of the people….I said it…that they may believe that thou hast sent me” John 11:42.

The resurrection of Lazarus is the same as the creation of Lazarus. His cells were all putrefied and were as non existing as had been the cells of Adam…so in the truest of sense Lazarus was created by Jesus..as we will be recreated in our immortal bodies….and just as Jesus was recreated in His.

And whereas Jesus will be calling us from the graves at the first resurrection…do you think it then matters who has the power to call us from the grave—He or His Father?

But should in case you still have questions—-read Proverbs chapter 8:22-36…..and tell me what you think. Who would you say did the creating? God or Jesus?

Here’s another question. We are sinners—-we are undeserving to be called “sons of God” and “joint heirs with His Son”….but aren’t we? Are you as “joint heir” equal with Jesus? If you are—-You then should not have a problem in seeing Jesus equal to His Father and as a consequence, equal in every respect. So any reference to Jesus as creating the heaven and the earth; is the same reference as God creating the heaven and the earth.

Re Ellen White’s writings as scripture…..
Ellen White’s writings can only be considered scripture, if her writings add to scripture what is not already revealed in scripture; re the salvation that is already and totally there; and is all about Jesus… and all about Jesus alone…and all already in scripture!

The entirety of scripture is about Jesus and the salvation he came to give sinners. There is nothing else! So if Ellen White adds to the story of salvation what is not already known re salvation; her writings would then have to be considered scripture.

The parts of scripture that have nothing to do with salvation, are there for our admonition, encouragement, advice etc; and whether we read and obey or other, will have no bearing re our salvation, if we ignore in any way shape or form, the core of salvation; Jesus our Passover Lamb. On the other hand; anyone who loves the author of salvation would live out in their lives any godly advice given by a parent, a pastor, or one’s next door neighbor;including, be that next door neighbor, Ellen White. And whereas the advice, encouragement, or other from pastor or next door neighbor, is not considered scripture, neither would any such similar advice from Ellen White.

Courtney

It is therefore clear that celebrating the Passover feast is also celebrating our salvation; and we will all be celebrating with God, our Saviour and the heavenly hosts on the Sabbath.

It is also for just this reason that even though the ancient Israelites kept the Sabbath; yet they “couldn’t enter into the eternal rest”, because they didn’t believe the gospel of salvation that was represented in the keeping of the Sabbath. See Hebrews chapter 3:18,19….chap.4:1-4.

Courtney

The word “Lord” in Rev. 4:11 is the same Greek word which clearly refers to Jesus in other passages (see Matthew 7:21-22, 8:25, 12:8, etc.). Eph. 3:9 likewise speaks of any member of the Godhead, to include Jesus, in using “God.” This Greek word speaks specifically of Jesus in multiple places as well. I agree with you regarding the Sabbath. It is a clear sign that God created this world and created us, and He is therefore Lord of this world, the Sabbath, and us.

The discussion over to whom the title “Creator” belongs is a far better one than the one many so-called Christians are having over whether God was even involved in the creative process. This illustrates my point quite well, that there is a limit to the liberty and independence an Adventist institution or its employees can have from our fundamental beliefs. While I choose still to believe that Jesus is the Creator, and I have texts to support my view (and which clarify your texts to show they support my position too), I would never be so radical as to suppose that you or other Adventist employees should adhere to my view in place of yours, nor would I call for you or others to be fired for such a small difference.

But to teach agnostic, macro-evolution and/or “mainstream science” as if it were fact, and that God did not do what He said He did in the Bible (Creation, the Deluge, etc.) is pure, unadulterated foolishness (see 1 Corinthians 3:19). To know the Adventist message, and to have the privilege of God’s truth in our hands and yet _still_ covet the world’s praise by accepting its agnostic theories hook, line, and sinker–and to further scoff at those who would find fault with such fiction–is a significant step beyond foolishness. Can we safely allow such false shepherds to teach our lambs without being held accountable for it in the Judgment?

Erik

3. Father:
God the eternal Father is the Creator, Source, Sustainer, and Sovereign of all creation….

I don’t believe the Father is the Creator. My Bible tells me this title belongs to Jesus. John summed it up nicely in his first chapter.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made…. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us…. (John 1:1-3, 14)

God the Father was not made flesh, so the “Word” of whom it is said that “All things were made by him” can be none other than Jesus Christ.

I also disagree with the first “Fundamental” in reference to the scriptures. The Bible defines what constitutes “scripture” and by its definition, Mrs. White’s writings are also “scripture” (given by inspiration of God, aren’t they?). So I do not limit scripture to just the Old and New Testaments, as the “Fundamentals” do.

There are other disagreements I have. But not a one of my beliefs contradicts Scripture. If I am shown from the Bible where my belief does not match, I will accept the truth and adjust my belief accordingly.

If Adventist professors are equally willing to grow in the light of truth, and to only differ with the “Fundamentals” where to do so follows the Bible even more closely, then I see no reason to “limit” their liberty. The “Fundamentals” should not really be our ultimate guide–that place is reserved for the Scriptures.

Erik

Evolution is idealogically incompatible with the Bible record. People who desire to teach at our universities should be permitted to do so if they believe & teach the things that we stand for. Those who cannot agree with our position on a six day creation should have the decency to work elsewhere. It’s the right thing to do.

@Denver Fletcher:

Bob

My view is that – claims to possessing an education notwithstanding – those who claim that Christianity and evolution can be reconciled, simply do not understand either.

Denver -

That is true. What is amazing is that Darwin himself figured that out – as did Richard Dawkins, P.Z Meyers, Provine… et al.

Certainly in 3SG 90-91 it is clear that Ellen White was informed in no uncertain terms about that point you raise in the post above.

And then there is that list of a few examples our 28FB showing just where evolutionism flatly contradicts the doctrinal statement of Seventh-day Adventists.

http://www.educatetruth.com/articles/evolution-in-education-by-jay-gillimore/comment-page-3/#comment-4813

in Christ,

Bob

My view is that – claims to possessing an education notwithstanding – those who claim that Christianity and evolution can be reconciled, simply do not understand either.

Christianity REQUIRES God; not merely any God, but THE God of the scriptures.

Evolution REQUIRES that such a God does not exist.

The two BELIEFS are eternally and inextricably opposed.

Only one who does not understand either of them can claim to believe both simultaneously. The cognitive dissonance that arises from attempts to reconcile these contrary ideas quite regularly manifests itself in a rage against any who draw attention to the contradiction, and associated contempt as over-compensation for self-doubt.

It does neither us nor them any good to rail against them. On the contrary, we must pray all the more for people so confounded in darkness as to believe they are living in the light.

In my experience, that is usually the BEST thing we can do for anyone, ourselves included.

Regards
Denver

So thinking along those lines – take a look at this -
http://www.educatetruth.com/la-sierra-evidence/perspectives-from-alleged-lsu-students/comment-page-4/#comment-9770

Do you think of the reference given there as a case of the right amount of criticism given the level of the crisis being addressed?

in Christ,

Bob

In the above quote taken from Vicki Gillham comments; advice is given re avoiding “intolerance” and “harshness”; and as well “taking things out of context”.

It may well be true that only “prophets” have the right to be “harsh”;as is suggested in Vicki’s comments;….but if I understand the intent of Christ chasing, and with a whip, the false representatives who made His Father’s house a “den of thieves”…and it may also be true only Elijah can manifest “intolerance”,[he mocked his fellow Israelites; and told them to yell at their god baal, who was probably asleep;seeing he wasn't answering]…and it may also be that only Jesus can call false prophets, “harlots” and “adulterers”; and in Revelation 3:16-21, add that he “will KILL WITH DEATH the children of Jezebel, the adultress, AND false prophetess….but again; if I understand the intent of Jesus’ “intolerance”, it must also be true that such reasons for intolerance still continued after Jesus’ “harsh” condemnation of same. If this is also true; and since Jesus is no more on earth in the flesh; whose is therefore the right to also condem those, who like their forbears, are the false prophets of today?

But if it is also true that His word stand fast forever; and stands true in every and all generations…then if should also be true that since there are false prophets in existence today, then any condemnation applicable to previous false prophets, must also be applicable to all and every current false prophet.

The question then is; who has the right to condem the false prophets in existence today?
Paul gives the answer: “If any preach a different gospel; let him be accursed”. How did Christ condem the “accursed”? “I will kill her children with death”. Revelation 2:21-23

It is not those who rightly represent the purity of truth and in context with the “cutting”, to the “dividing bone and marrow”, that are “intolerant”. Truth can only be seen for what it is…TRUTH, and no representing truth can be seen as intolerance….(In context…Elijah and the Israelite prophets of baal)….the rather, it is those who would water down truth to lure the false into its acceptance, that are described by Paul as false teachers who teach others what they want to hear.

Jesus’ example of meeting “head on” progenitors of falsehoods, is seen in His condemnation of false doctrines when He was on earth. He proclaimed the false doctrines of the Israelite leadership as “doctrines of men”;stating that they were worshipping Him in vain/useless worship…He called the false leadership “blind leaders”…and those who followed their leadership…”blind”….”both”, He said would fall into the proverbial “pit”. Paul referred to false doctrines as “doctrines of devils”, and there is no more “loving way” way to approach satan and his hirelings, than with the two-edged sword that Jesus has in His mouth. Revelation 2:12,16.

Courtney Edwards