Dr.Desmond Ford, Loma Linda 2008-This I Believe

[fleetwd1]

Great view of EGW. It recognizes her gift as is was truly given, not as the SDA distortions have claimed and taught. The SDA distortion of her gift discredits her more than anything. They should be held accountable for their distortion. However people fight over the distortion but they wrongfully make it about her. Learn the difference Fight the distortion of her, if you will, but do not fight the reality. "For if they do these things to the least of these my servants they have done it to me".

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

Matthew 13:29 talks about the wheat and the tares but you seem to have forgotten and now judges everyone as tares. Just because there are legalists and heretics and extremists in the Church doesn't mean that this applies to everyone, does it? Rooting up the wheat with the tares is not fighting distortion you cannot solve a problem while yourself is causing the problem!

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 Anyone following this exchange should readily perceive who is judging whom.Your words will judge you. I am only pointing out the obvious that you may see if you have eyes to, and hear if you have ears to, and feel if you have a heart to do so.Trusting in Christ for righteousness is your only hope, not in doctrinal purity, nor in holding to perceived doctrinal pillars of the faith.This Dr Ford understands extremely well and communicates it worldwide.You would do well to acknowledge it.

[fleetwd1]

@fleetwd1 for those who are interested rev2214 and I started this exchange on a different video upload of cornerstone111 titled Dr.Desmond Ford: Investigative Judgment Part 1:

it would not let me post the link, so I hope the title will do.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

"Your words will judge you" If you have accepted the Gospel of righteousness which Des Ford was preaching, which you should, how is it that your language is so condemnatory?

And who sold you the falsehood that the SDA church had doctrinal purity as a basis for salvation? Should you not at least try and have your facts right before making so many false assumptions?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 I find it peculiar that you would say my language is condemnatory. Perhaps it is your conscience that is speaking to you. I have no malice toward you. You certainly have a malicious spirit toward Dr Ford.

I did not mention "the SDA church" when I stated, Trusting in Christ for righteousness is your only hope, not in doctrinal purity, nor in holding to perceived doctrinal pillars of the faith. So getting facts strait may be more directed back at you as words written in haste often are.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

"Trusting in Christ for righteousness is your only hope, not in doctrinal purity, nor in holding to perceived doctrinal pillars of the faith"

So if you did not mean the SDA Church who did you mean?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 Well I debated stating it like this "Trusting in Christ for righteousness is our only hope, not in doctrinal purity, nor in holding to perceived doctrinal pillars of the faith." it is only one letter difference and has the same meaning. pillars of the faith has a SDA ring to it. But as I pointed out at Andrews University Seminary Isaiah ch 1 has the Prophet challenging their prayers their Sabbaths and their sacrifices. There is nothing more pillar of the faith than these to Israel.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

"I am only pointing out the obvious that you may see if you have eyes to, and hear if you have ears to, and feel if you have a heart to do so.Trusting in Christ for righteousness is your only hope, not in doctrinal purity, nor in holding to perceived doctrinal pillars of the faith"

As I have never trusted in doctrine nor pillars of faith for salvation, nor was I ever told to do so, what was it that caused u to make such a charge?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 you perceive this as a slam to you? it was meant to lift you, not slam you. it was meant to lift your thoughts higher to Christ who is your righteousness. perhaps your spirit is not able to perceive? it is a spiritual matter.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

That's ok. We all make mistakes!

I find it very intriguing that Dr Ford can preach such beautiful sermons on righteousness by faith and yet run into such awful problems with the rest of Scripture! It just goes to prove that a PHD can sometimes be a hindrance rather than a help!

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 if you believe Des' beautiful sermons on righteousness by faith that would be sufficient. As long as you look to Christ for justifying righteousness you can not be lost. Many are critical of others and Jesus said, say whatever you will about the son of man it will be forgiven but do not slander the Holy Spirit for this will not be forgiven (this would apply to His servants as well). With this said, it is better not to slander Christ or His servants. the word says Speak evil of no man.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

You are assuming that I am judging Des Ford as being lost. From my discussion on this channel everyone seem to think that to disagree is to condemn. Disagreement is not condemnation. The Bible tells us that we should not try to decide who is lost and who is saved. What we are told to do as a duty is to contend for the faith once delivered to the saints. When people are preaching truth mixed with error we should certainly take the truth and reject the error. We judge ideas not men!

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 You wrote, Ford has to find fault with the Scriptures itself. Ford is reading u Scripture without any depth of understanding and instead of earnestly praying that God wud help him 2 understand he has ended up depending on his own intelect which has let him down as so often hapens 2 all who" trust in their own hearts." God only knows this info, I assume nothing. I give you light you see it as darkness and an attack against you. You have difficulty with spiritual matters and discernment.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

By the way, you might like to check on Jack Sequeira. He explains Romans in much more detail and does a much better job than Dr Ford without the need keep attacking and disparaging Ellen White and the Church. Having said that I should point out the danger of being disciples of men. "Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. 4His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish. Ps 146

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 I know Jack.

You suggest Ford is attacking and disparaging Ellen White and the Church. I have never heard anything like what you suggest. Where is your evidence?

Jesus was accused of disregarding the Sabbath and blasphemy, Paul was accused of attacking Moses and the law. Isaiah was accused of attacking the pillars of the faith. Where is the proof of your allegations on Des? All your words of condemnation reveal your heart. Is yours the heart of those who accused Jesus, Paul or Isaiah?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 Where is your evidence?...I guess you have no evidence. Where is the proof of your allegations?...nor do you have any proof for your allegations.

As usual you read what I have written wrong. (this would apply to His servants as well) is connected not to the "Holy Spirit" but to "say whatever you will about the son of man it will be forgiven" however the Holy Spirit may speak to you while listening to Des, if you attribute this work of the Spirit to Satan you will not be forgiven.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

I think U R getting a bit confused. Whenever R whoever speaks truth the Holy Spirit will use the truth to speak to us even if it is being spoken by the street sweeper. If people, however, are mixing truth with error that is when WE need the guidance of the Holy Spirit so we can rightly divide the word of truth. The fatal mistake u r making is in putting Des Ford on a pedestal as if he is the infallible voice of God. As SDAs we r in the camp of Sola Scriptura, not in the camp F Popes

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

"Where is your evidence?...I guess you have no evidence. Where is the proof of your allegations?...nor do you have any proof for your allegations."

"This is the service which began when the 2300 days ended. At that time, as foretold by Daniel the prophet, our High Priest entered the most holy, to perform the last division of His solemn work--to cleanse the sanctuary." GC 421

There is the evidence. This chiefly is what Dr Ford has spent most of his life refuting and disparaging!

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 Do you not know how her statement supporting the view that the law in Galatians was the ceremonial law was being used by the GC president to refute Jones and Wagner's view of this matter? EGW said it was unfortunate that he had used her writings in this way, and then she confirmed that the law in Galatians was in fact the moral law as well. So if you are saying she would not modify her statement, if she were alive, I would say you do not know her well enough because she did just that.

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 Further the statement,"We have much to learn and much to unlearn" came from her pen. We includes her. The SDA Church paints a false view of EGW's gift. She never claimed infallibility. She modified many of her views when she found them to be in error. She once endorsed the shut door theory. Later she modified her view on that. Des has followed the same practice admitting wrong when he discovers it. I have not heard of such candor from SDA leadership. Your evidence is no evidence @all.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

If this is the case what wrong did Des admit and where in Ellen White's writings did she change or correct her belief in the SDA's understanding of Dan 8:14?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 One wrong admitted by Des is before the 1970s he had sometimes made statements that confused Justification and Sanctification. After Present Truth clarified this issue, he maintains a distinction between the two. Palmdale conference in 1976 was over this very issue. SDA scholars agreed with Des and prevented the SDA leadership from firing him.

The point with EGW is there are examples of her changing her mind on doctrines held. I gave you two the Law in Galatians & the shut door theory.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

Ellen G. White 1888 Materials, 566.

"Unfortunately, this wonderful message has been perverted, especially by the antinomians.(1) There has been a desire to diminish the relevance of the law of God to the principles of salvation. That was never the intent. It has led others to assert that the gospel of salvation is justification alone, and that sanctification does nothing to qualify us for heaven"

Well from this statement it appears Des is stil confusing the two!

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 this is not a statement of Des.

[rev2214]

@rev2214

What Ellen White was talking about was those who were perverting the wonderful message of righteousness by faith. This is what Paul was warning about in Romans 3:31. It is interesting to notice that every teaching in the Bible has been counterfeited and corrupted in one way or other. So have you ever paused to ask just how this doctrine have been perverted?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 EGW rightfully points out some pervert the gospel by not seeing the place law has in proclaiming the gospel. The gospel is the legal means for God to be just and the justifier of the ungodly who believe. Paul said, "Do we nullify the law by faith? God forbid, we establish it." Legalism tries to bring a lessor standard, their own attempt to keep it. Faith brings the righteousness of another, the only One who kept God's law from birth to death perfectly for us. Antinomians disregard law.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

"If you love me keep my commandments" John 14:15

So is obedience an act of legalism or is it a sign a loyalty?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 it depends on the motive. You can be like Paul's kinsmen who "have a zeal for God but not according to knowledge. For not knowing about God's righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit themselves to the righteousness of God." Sanctification is "the righteousness of the law which shall be fulfilled in us if we walk not after the flesh but after the spirit." But by it "shall no flesh be justified." Justification is "the righteousness of God." They are distinct.

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 Legalism blurs the distinction and never submits to trust God's righteousness alone. They want to confuse and co-mingle justification and sanctification. Never fully confident, nor ever fully meeting the full requirement of the law. Legalism lowers the bar of God's justice in order that their own attempt at keeping it is then made acceptable. Faith in God's righteousness keeps the standard "higher than the highest human thought can reach is God's standard for his people." Night and Day.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

If this is what you believe then why are you making such a fuss? Have you watched Jack Sequeira over on my channel? If you haven't please do so you can get some understanding of what I understand righteousness by faith to be. You cannot just keep running with the assumption that because SDAs keep the Sabbath then this must mean they are all a bunch of legalist. People who love God and obey Him aren't legalist. Legalist are people trying to get saved by their own works!

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 You are the one making accusations w/o facts like "You cannot just keep running with the assumption that because SDAs keep the Sabbath then this must mean they are all a bunch of legalist." Did I say, or even think, any such thing? Have I written this somewhere? Please show any evidence of this or any other accusation you have made! Of course you haven't any evidence. You ramble on accusing with no backup. You dodge and weave but answer nothing. Your words judge you. I do not have to.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

I am seriously beginning to doubt whether you know what it is that you are taking issue with. You keep going on about legalism but since SDAs aren't legalist who are you accusing of being legalists. If that is not what you are taking issue with then what are u trying to say? What is your question, what is it that you are trying to find out? What exactly am I dodging and weaving? Seeing I don't know what you are trying to say, do you know?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 I did not seek you out. You sought me. Did you not?

Now to your accusation, I only ask show me. Show me where I assume "because SDAs keep Sabbath" "they are all a bunch of legalists." Are these not your written words alleging these are my written words or thoughts. Prove what you write. It is that simple.

You don't know me. If you now want to agree with what I write, good for you. I have serious questions about your writing. You are not very clear and you lack proper evidence.

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 Just because i define what legalism is for clarity, why do you say I am necessarily accusing someone by my definition? You ask if it is legalism to obey Christ's words? I point out it is a matter of motive. So I define it. Why do you twist everything into accusations? Your fighting everyone on YouTube has you suffering a complex. You lash out with libelous untruths, You read into what is written what you imagine it to be. You do not read what is written to be informed. Your loss.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

People who R justified by Christ righteousnes R also supposed 2 B affected by His holiness. The Bible tels us that LOVE does not insist on having it's own way. Love sufers long and is KIND. So this is about the fruit of the SPIRIT." If any man have not the Spirit he is none of His." Rom 8:11.

If in the course of our discussion if I make a statement you do not agree with why don't you clarify instead of telling me how my words will judge me. What kind of God r u following?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 Changing the subject again are we? Is it too complicated for you? Or do you not want to admit a fault. It is a very simple thing I ask. Either show me where I write or thought what you said I did or admit you made it up.

You ask me a Question about legalism. Then you say why are you going on and on about legalism if your not accusing SDAs. Did you forget who brought it up? This requires a simple yes or no answer. Perhaps you can manage this.

Ethical behavior does not lie about others.

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 The God i follow spoke these words, Mt 12:36-37 "every careless word that men shall speak they shall render account for it in the day of judgment. For by your words you shall be justified and by your words you shall be condemned." JN 8:47 "He who is of God hears the words of God;" should you ignore Him, "for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God."

John wrote, 3Jn 10 "Unjustly accusing us with wicked words" I ask, how is it different when you do this very thing?

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

So are you just talking about righteousness by faith but have no idea what it is.

Do I wish to play your little game? Not really!!

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 First off remember the game was initiated by you not me. Bite off more than you can chew? You are free to quit. It is obvious you do not want to answer simple questions. These may incriminate you. You may have to face up to what you need to be justified from, not in. Those who justify themselves need no Savior. Just as the healthy need no Physician. If you confess your sin there is forgiveness. If you hide your sin there is no forgiveness. False accusation is sin. Fess up and be clean.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

Call it what you will, I think you are just confused and immature and don't know what you are on about. Try and get a handle on the subject so you can come back and have a sensible discussion instead of all the senseless rantings!

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 Sure make it about me. Refuse to admit culpability. FYI R by F is the skillful use of Law and Gospel, Justice and Mercy. You ask for mercy but I had offered that previously you insinuated it was meant as evil toward you. Now I point you to the law to make you sensible to your need. Something you boast that you keep. The law shows no mercy. It standard is higher than you can think or do. Admit fault and live (mercy) or perish in your sin (law). it seems you want to be saved in your sin.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

"THOU SHALL NOT MAKE UNTO THYSELF ANY GRAVEN IMAGE... THOU SHALL NOT BOW DOWN THYSELF TO THEM" EXODUS 20:4-5

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 When you correct others, Why are you blind to your own guilt? Ex 20:16 reads You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. You claim to keep the commandments but you have libeled me and fail to admit it. Why do you insist that hockeyrulesus repent while you are not willing to do the same?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 you wrote these words implying they were mine, "because SDAs keep Sabbath..they are all a bunch of legalists." I ask you to prove this allegation, or admit it is false. Where is your answer? Stop hiding behind the guilt of others. Apply your teachings to yourself. It is not what you teach but what you do that matters. Practice what you preach. Falsehood is falsehood even if it parades itself as truth. Answer the hard question. Stop changing the subject, stop blame shifting, come clean.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

1 John 2:4

He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

Revelation 21:27

And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 this just proves you do not know him when you lie.

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 Rev 21:27 "And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth...or maketh a lie"

It amazes me how you dig your own grave with your quotes. Do they not apply equally to you too?

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

"I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart". Psa 40:8

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 You affirm what is right, His will defined by his His law should be the delight of the converted. The issue is in what you deny. You want to hold others to the high standard of His law but you disobey the standard yourself. You make a big deal over the sin of others but minimize your own. I do not argue the merit of those who disobey, my argument is that your words used against them hold you accountable too. I ask is this not hypocritical? No answer, or changing subject, affirms guilt.

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 For all your professing to be right "in need of nothing", your words and actions are proof you are crooked, "poor, naked and blind". "Buy of Me gold refined by fire, that you may be rich and white garments, that you may cloth yourself, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed, and eye-salve to anoint your eyes, that you may see. Those I love, I reprove and discipline. Be zealous therefore and repent." If you reject His discipline you are an illegitimate child living fantasy.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

Why don't you try and show me what you have if you know what it is that you do have instead of trying to tell me what I don't have seeing you have no idea?

You profess to understand righteousness by faith but can you explain what it is? Finding Bible text to use as a weapon won't help your argument unless you can use them in a constructive way to clarify YOUR position.

You said you want to fight distortion but how can u straighten something when u don't kno what makes it crucked?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 Did you not write this? "@hockeyrulesus...The wages of sin is death" Romans 6:23. So unless you repent you are going to get the wages of your sin!" I ask, how does this not apply to you? Do you think that you are immune from prosecution? On what basis do you think you can make statements but do not follow what you yourself say? Are you a great teacher with thoughts of grandeur knowing more than your opponents? Or rather are you not binding heavy burdens yet unwilling to lift a finger?

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

So hockeyrulesus is telling me he is a Catholic and that it is ok to bow down before idols, do you think that is a sin that needs repenting of or not?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 Rom 2:17 "..if you rely on the law and brag about your relationship to God..if you are convinced you are a guide..a light..an instructor..a teacher..18 You, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself?" I ask you, is libeling others, spreading unfounded accusations, not a sin that needs repenting of? 23 "You who brag about the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law?" You shall not bear false witness. How is it different? Is not one law broken the same as breaking them all?

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

So are you a Roman Catholic priest and wish me to confess my sins to you?

I was telling hockeyrulesus that it is a sin to worship idols so you are trying to defend his idolatry. For the record I do not bow down to graven images. When Jesus sent out his disciples or prophets to go and tell people to repent it did not mean themselves were sinless. T be a true witness you dont have to be sinless to preach the gospel all you have to do is be forgiven and obedient

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 I do not defend his idolatry. Nor do I ask you to confess to me. I ask you to apply the principle you use against him to yourself. Idolatry is sin but bearing false witness is also sin. If you say to him Repent or die in your sin. How does this not apply to you who bear false witness. When I ask you for evidence you have not falsely accused me, you change subject, ignore my request, and give no answer. This convicts you further. Evasion is further evidence against you. Is it not?

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

Where have I falsely accused u?

The fact u take sides with someone who prays to an idol should tell u something, shouldn't it?

How would pointing out the danger of sin to someone so they can recognize the sin and repent make me guilty of the sin I am pointing out.

2 Timothy 4:2 "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine."

Why aren't you doing what the Bible says instead of taking me to task for doing it?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 you ask "Where have I falsely accused u?" How many times must I ask why you wrote, I assume "because SDAs keep Sabbath...they are all a bunch of legalists." When I give you opportunity to prove your allegation, you change the subject, give no answer and blame me for other imagined offences like, "The fact u take sides with someone who prays to an idol.." You avoid the issue of your sin. Your sin is like the sin you condemn─it violates God's law. You teach against sin but practice it.

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 If you practice sin, all you teaching against sin goes for naught. It is for nothing. All your claims to love God's law is negated.

By condemning others sin you condemn yourself, for you are guilty of sin too.

You fight an imaginary argument you devise in your own mind. You avoid what is clear and you make your polluted allegations. Your words do not vindicate you as you imagine, they just reveal your true condition.

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

So you are upset because I thought you were saying SDAs are legalists and you were not saying that, is that right?

Look if this is what has happened I am really sorry!!

If that is the case why don't you correct me and let me know what it is you are saying instead you keep sending me to hell?

[fleetwd1]

@rev2214 finally, yes this is right! Apology accepted.

I do not know how I could have been clearer.

You should not assume what people think. While your arguments may apply to others you fight with, making blanket accusations to everyone you take issue with is a sign of immaturity.

Now you can be made clean by Christ who cleanses us. We all make mistakes but denying them keeps us from benefiting from his cleansing blood. R by F admits our culpability and wears His Righteousness alone. Peace!

[rev2214]

@fleetwd1

That's fine but I am still none the wiser!