HomeDailyThursday: The Three Angels’ Messages    

Comments

Thursday: The Three Angels’ Messages — 14 Comments

  1. The Three Angels' Messages. That's us isn't it? That has been part of our DNA for as long as I can remember. I learned it for one of my Junior Missionary Volunteer classes as as doctrinal text and it was a point of honour to be able to write the whole passage out 100% correct. Seventy years latter, I can still do a passably good job of reciting it. I don't know how many churches still have some sort of symbolic representation of the angels flying through the air and blowing trumpets, but it was very popular about 30 years ago.

    It should be noted that memorising the scripture and displaying symbolic representations of it on our walls are empty of we do not understand the message and put it into practice. In a world that is largely dead to spiritual issues we need to be a living voice in a language that people can understand. Ultimtely we need to live the gospel in a way that draws others to Jesus. And that only happens when we have a living relationship with him ourselves. That is a lot different to memorising the texts.

    (59)
  2. 2 of your posted items R extremely relevant & helpful 2 our class review time.
    ■1. (evangelize in a living voice that people can understand). Very often members ask "What does that mean". By the time busy mothers google word meanings & idioms there's precious little teaching time left 4 understanding texts & context. texts.It's hard 2 review a lesson with members who have not studied or read & it is sometimes easier 2 teach the lesson as if members (mostly moms) have not heard it b4.The Holy Spirit is my GPS.
    ■2.I need a living relationship with JC24/7. I have found joy also in having a living relationship with my fellow class members during the week.Sharing their joys/sorrows & family events provide real opportunities for learning about the sanctuary foundations together; especially after Sabbath fellowship lunch discussions, & particularly when I remember that all credit goes 2 JC24/7. May God continue 2 bless U with more insightful teaching plans.

    (16)
  3. Worshiping can signify a life of numerous "dos" and "don'ts" rather than a life of constant search for the will of the Creator. Work should produce wages - the compensation for my efforts is natural! These two critical points get my attention. Do I care more about my job than the way I worship? Shouldn't worship be my constant focus, even within my daily activities?

    (6)
  4. A point of may I know..why do us Seventh Day Adventists major mostly in studying The Third Angel' message more than the other two Angels' messages ?

    (2)
  5. second angel message started from 1844 up to Sunday law? and the third message start from second angel message (from sunday law) till judgement?

    (0)
  6. What I find interesting, and Thursday's lesson brings these thoughts to my mind, is that Seventh-Day Adventists are always particular in ensuring that Revelation 14:12 is translated correctly, that the correct grammar is used, that we are to have the faith OF Jesus, not just faith IN Jesus.

    What I then don't understand, is why do we continue to try to make the point the Revelation 1:1 says that it is the revelation or Jesus as in that Jesus is being revealed? The grammatical construct is the same in Rev 14:12 as it is in Rev 1:1. It comes down to the use of the English word "of" and it's meaning. "Of" can have many meanings in English and the correct one in this case needs to be determine by what the original Greek says. It is the Revelation OF Jesus (in other words, possessed by Jesus, in His possession), NOT the revealing of Jesus. What is being revealed is something else "things that are soon to take place". Making Revelation 1:1 say that Jesus is being revealed doesn't even make sense in the plain reading of that verse. It is a revelation that God gave to Jesus and He gave it to John through His angel. Did God give Jesus a revelation of Jesus?

    To me this looks like an attempt to solidify a cliche which is often used: it is all about Jesus. The Bible is all about Jesus. Yes, as an overarching principle it is, but in substance, once you look at the text closely, no. Every book or chapter is about a different subject. Genesis is about creation and the history of the world. Song of Solomon is a about young marital love. Daniel's prophecies cover the broad-scale history of the world from his time onwards. Of course Jesus figures in there, but if you were to summarise them in one statement could you really say they are about Jesus? And Revelation is about things which were soon to take place, in the context of God's people, from the perspective of the 1st century AD. So, if we are so particular about getting the grammar correct in Revelation 14:12, how about we be just as particular in getting it right in Revelation 1:1?

    (0)
    • Leo, you make your point based on the English use of prepositions "of", "in" and so on. My understanding - and I am not a linguist - is that the prepositional construct is simply not there in the Greek and is added by the translators to make sense of the Greek wording in English. I know there are a great many preachers who make the sermon-length point that we have got it wrong. But, having looked at the original Greek in interlinear Bibles, I simply cannot find, based on the text, the use of one preposition is more valid than another. Perhaps, you have more knowledge of the Greek language contructs used and can let us know why linguistically one is to be preferred over another.

      (2)
    • I am not an SDA prodigy having taken a very circuitous route to become settled upon being one, THat being said, I have never seen this usage interpreted in the way that you are. It is not to revelation of Jesus. in the sense it is Jesus being revealed by God the Father; rather, the message given as The Revelation belongs to Jesus and He is presenting it to John to be recorded for all generations so we will know what is to be.

      (1)
      • Ranko Stefanovic, in his book "Revelation of Jesus Christ" makes the following point: "This can be understood in two ways: either that the visions given to John were from Jesus Christ or that he, Jesus Christ, is the person revealed. It is most likely that both concepts are intended. The book of Revelation is the unveiling of Jesus Christ-his revelation-in which he reveals his post-Calvary ministry on behalf of the church."

        I don't believe that both concepts are intended if one reads the verse in its entirety. Grammatically and logically, the revelation comes FROM Jesus.

        And then, I have seen numerous pastors claiming that Jesus is being revealed in Revelation, and that that is what Rev 1:1 is saying. (Sorry, can't recall their names.)

        (1)
  7. There is actually only "One" identifiying mark for those that do not worship the Beast and its image: They have made Jesus their Lord and Saviour. Jesus then makes up for their "Unavoidable Deficiencies with His Own Divine Merits" for Keeping His 10 Commandments.

    (1)
  8. Inge Anderson, the question is ludicrous to say the least about "Two Identifying Marks" on God's "End Time People." First of all, there will be no "Mark of the Beast" until the "Spurious Sabbath" is legally enforced with "Capital Punishing Laws for not keeping it as if it was a Holy Day." This is what makes Sunday "The Mark of the Beast" and not until then. So until then, there are no identifying marks to the "True Followers of God and Jesus." Until then, there will be "True Followers of Jesus that are still keeping Sunday as their Sabbath.

    (1)
    • I think the key words are "End Time People," and that question is reasonable. It just depends on how you choose to define "end time." When I read that, I read it as referring to the very end of time ...

      You appear to affirm that when Sunday is legally enforced, those who still keep it will get the "mark of the beast." The corollary would appear to be that those who keep the Sabbath under threat of punishment or death will be those who have the seal of God.

      I agree with the following:

      Until then, there will be "True Followers of Jesus that are still keeping Sunday as their Sabbath.

      (2)
      • But again, Inge Anderson, "Now" is the time to live for Jesus whether we keep the right day or not. In 1844 there was not "One Single Person" that was keeping "The Right Day Holy." So, until there is a "Mark of the Beast" the only thing that counts is staying connected with Jesus via His Holy Spirit and His "Two Great Commandments," 1. Loving God with our whole souls and hearts, and 2. Loving our neighbors as ourselves; and this can be done whether we keep the right day or not until there is a "Mark of the Beast."

        (1)

Leave a Reply

Please read our Comment Guide Lines and note that we have a full-name policy.

Please make sure you have provided a full name in the "Name" field and a working email address we can use to contact you, if necessary. (Your email address will not be published.)

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>