Hello there, I'm new here! Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Former Adventist Fellowship Forum » ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS 2 » Hello there, I'm new here! « Previous Next »

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
Archive through July 18, 2003Colleentinker21 7-18-03  2:05 pm
Archive through July 29, 2003Jerry20 7-29-03  11:01 am
Archive through August 01, 2003Melissa20 8-01-03  7:54 am
Archive through August 04, 2003Susan_220 8-04-03  11:27 am
  ClosedClosed: New threads not accepted on this page        

Author Message
Melissa (Melissa)
Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 1:41 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I gave B the article by Cottrell. First he started by saying he wasnít that respected among the scholars. (it seems to be typical to go for the character first, then maybe the context will be ignored?? He did that with Reaís book too.) Anyway. He said he didnít understand the terms the author used, so he passed the URL along to his pastor. He still thinks all their fundmental beliefs 100% scriptural.
Jerry (Jerry)
Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 7:39 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Cottrell was quite well respected until he contradicted SDA orthodoxy.

In fact, there are likely many SDA scholars who privately respect him, but, if they wish to keep their jobs, they dare not publicly say so.

This is a very familiar pattern.

For stark examples of this, look into D. M. Canright and Desmond Ford.
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 11:34 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

You're right, Jerry. Cottrell was on the committee that wrote/edited the SDA Bible Commentary. He was an expert Hebrew scholar, and SDAs continue to use his scholarship in the form of the SDA Bible Commentaries. He was also an assistant editor of the Adventist Review for many years.

An independent writer (a very liberal SDA) whom many of you would recognize is working on Cottrell's biography. He has been given complete access to all of Cottrell's files. He has found some amazing things, including Cottrell's notes re: the meeting of the Commentaries committee when they dealt with the passage concerning Daniel 8:14. The Committee had voted not to include any interpretation of biblical passages unless they had a unanimous vote on the contents.

When they tried to deal with Daniel 8:14, the passage about the sanactuary being "cleansed" which ultimately formed the central argument for the investigative judgment, 5 members of the committe of (13? 12? I can't remember the exact number) did not agree with the SDA interpretation. Ther rest of the committee said they could support the SDA official position. Since they were at an impasses, the five dissenters compromised. They agreed to leave the room while the remaining members voted on the interpretation to be included in the Commentary. Thus they were able to include the traditional teaching with a "unanimous" vote. Cottrell's personal records contain the details of this event.

Another interesting fact these files have revealed is that during the 80s, Cottrell conducted a private survey of every SDA Hebrew scholar as well as every head of a theology department of an SDA college/university in the entire world. He sent out between 250 and 300 surveys. Surprisingly, every one of those surveys was returned, and Cottrell's biographer has read them. Cottrell asked whether or not they agreed with the SDA interpretation of Daniel 8:14 and whether or not they believed the IJ to be supported Biblically.

Every participant answered NO, he did not believe the SDA position.

I'm looking forward to reading this biography when it's done!

The fact is that Cottrell was probably one of the brightest minds in Adventism during the past 50 years. His scholarship was impeccable, and people who knew him respected him highly. He did compromise, however. He struggled over whether or not to publish his research re: Daniel 8:14, etc., right up to the last few years of his life. He chose not to publish during his lifetime.

Colleen
Melissa (Melissa)
Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 12:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Question: I had read about numerous other SDA pastors not agreeing with the churchís doctrine in least in this regard but teaching it anyway and I have to tell you, it makes me shake my head. I can understand being afraid of losing your job and the respect of family and friends, but these are eternal issues. Someday, we have to stand before God and be accountable for what we have done in the body. I know weíre still saved even if our works all burn up, but weíre talking about God Almighty. Itís not like Paul said where these things are done in ignorance (as may be the case of most lay people who havenít studied for themselves) ... these are educated men supposedly ìof Godî? It is easy for me to say not being in their position, but how seriously do they believe in God? I had to ask myself that question in my lifestyle choices, so I know itís hard. But my bad choices did not involve misleading a bunch of people into a life of error. Seems there would be greater accountability there. (teachers are going to be held to a higher standard.... I donít remember the verse exactly, so probably butchering it.)
Susan_2 (Susan_2)
Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 1:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Above Carol quotes Romans 8:28. I have quoted this text to my sda mother and here is the response I get from her: "A person who does not keep the 1o commandments, and this includes the forth as being kept holy from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday DOES NOT love God". And, there the discussion is ended.
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 1:28 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

You're right, Melissa. The text is Jame 3;1: "Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly."

Teaching is one of the gifts of the Spirit, though, so people who have been called and gifted to teach shouldn't fear that God will punish them for teaching! It does make me pretty sober, though, when I think about the eternal implications for me and for my students when I stand in front of those ninth graders and realize that God will judge me more strictly because the things I say are affecting ohters' lives.

The compromise you refer to in your post above, Melissa, is the worrisome thing. It's a terrifying thing to realize how tempting it is to rationlize a split between my practice and my teaching sometimes.

I'm thankful God is the judge of us, but that fact is also a promise of justice, whatever that may mean.

I know that many of the "intellectual elite" among Adventists really are compromised in their belief of Jesus and who he is. As I've mentioned before, I know an SDA professor on a faculty of religion at a large SDA institution who doesn't believe in Jesus. I know another who teaches some classes and holds a pastoral position who, I strongly suspect from conversations with him, does not believe in the full divinity of Jesus.

It goes without saying that they also do not believe in the dependability of the Bible. After all, if EGW was inspired the same way the Bible writers were inspired, then the Bible must be interpreted and re-defined just as Ellen is interpreted.

I know one highly educated and truly brilliant pastor who believes, as Jewish scholars believe, that the Messianic prophecies of Isaiah (the last twenty or so chapters of the book) were not written by Isaiah but by a post-Jesus imposter who mimiced Isaiah. (After all, how else could a Jewish scholar explain Jesus away when he so perfectly fulfilled Isaiah's prophecies?)

I do pray that God will protect me from deception and that he will continue to reveal himself to me.

Colleen
Doc (Doc)
Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 7:47 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Well that theory about Isaiah can be refuted by actual physical evidence.
There was a book of Isaiah found amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls. It dates back I think to 200 BC, but certainly to well before Christ, and it contains the whole book, including the 40-66 section, and there is no break between 39 and 40 to indicate it was written by anyone else.
Just a little fact,
God bless,
Doc
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Wednesday, August 06, 2003 - 9:06 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Thanks for that fact, Doc. I wonder how the Jewish professors at the university where said pastor studied explain that?!

Colleen
Janice (Janice)
Posted on Tuesday, August 12, 2003 - 4:18 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hello all,

How many of you still get the Glad Tidings newsletter? My sister placed my name on the mailing list, and I get mad everytime I get that thing and read it. I have never heard such "double-minded" talk in all my life and scripture plainly teaches that a "double-minded" man is "unstable" in ALL his ways.

On page four, someone asked the question: Did Christ's sacrifice on the cross reverse the evil that the first Adam did to the human race, resulting in a legal justification for all men? They go on into a comment about how some say that this would mean "justification by birth" instead of "by faith" and also they are told that it is not necessary to resist or reject the Holy Spirit in order to be lost, and that it is easy to be lost and hard to be saved. The person with the question then asks for a comment. This is where it got so "double" and as any of you could guess, the answers were taken from E.G. White's books. It mentions an objective gospel and defines it and then mentions the subjective gospel. Wow, how confusing! What is wrong with the gospel found in John 3:16? What is wrong with the gospel according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John?

What exactly does I John mean with verse 13-These things have I written unto you that YE MIGHT KNOW and BELIEVE on the name of the Son of God; that ye may have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God?

My SDA sister plainly told me that none of us could KNOW that we were saved for sure. (Isn't that the same as calling God a liar when we have his word that states "YE MIGHT KNOW" if clearly we can't be sure as she believes?) I know she didn't hear that nonsense taught in the Baptist church that we were raised in. The SDAs even convinced my sister that she wasn't even saved in the first place, so, this is why I always carry a burden concerning her salvation. No one knows better than their own self whether or not they are saved, so, is she or isn't she? Is she grieving the indwelt Holy Spirit or is his spirit inside her soul at all? I will always wonder about it and since she won't speak to me, I have to rely on the promise of God that he knows his own. I just pray that they got acquainted before all this mess got started.

Back to the question in the article, doesn't the word of God plainly state in Luke 19:10-For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost?

EGW offers some counsel (Don't you want to puke at that statement alone?) Listen to her silly statement here "Salvation is like the sunshine. It belongs to the WHOLE world. Christ took in his grasp the world over which Satan had claimed to preside... and by his wonderful work in giving his life, he restored the WHOLE race of men to favor with God."

Why can't the SDAs see that this is in complete contradiction to the word of God? Does the word not say that God is the Alpha and Omega...and changes not? Does it not also say that God cannot look upon sin? So how does EGW get off at saying that God is okay with this wicked world system that just keeps getting worse and worse (as scripture also prophecies?) God's word says that Jesus came to "save that which was lost" meaning the Jewish nation but when they turned him away, their stubborness and hardness of heart paved the way for the Gentile to be let into the fold.

A key element in understanding "last day" events begin with knowing that God deals with TWO distinctive groups of people. One group is the church (the church IS, contrary to EGW, the body of believers who have accepted Jesus Christ as their personal savior and entered into his continual "Sabbath rest") and the other group is Israel which, contrary also to EGW, is the 'remnant' or the 'elect' of God. Jesus died for the church and NONE will be lost, so, the SDAs need to get past thinking that they are 'sealed' by keeping Sabbath.

I just can't believe that for over a hundred years, people still take this woman seriously. Just because the SDAs have decided to "head for the hills" and shut off their TVs and bury their heads in the sand does not mean that Satan is not still actively going about his business of leading people into dangerous religious groups which are led by demonically influenced people such as EGW and other cult leaders who are leading the world down a dead-end road to hell which brings me to the front page story of that same newsletter titled "The Stupendous TRUTH Of Daniel 8:14-Does it appear in the New Testament" This article goes into the biblical doctrines embraced by the SDAs and speaks of ONE UNIQUE doctrine which is "the subject of the sanctuary", "the key which unlocked the mystery of the disappointment of 1844" and which "opened to view a complete system of TRUTH." The story also speaks about other denominations that teach about the "non-immortality of the soul" and mention other false teachers on that subject such as Edward Fudge and John Stott. (Is it supposed to be conforting to the SDAs to know that they are not exclusive in teaching false doctrines?) Jehovah's Witnesses also pass out tracts that state that a LOVING God wouldn't be so cruel as to make anyone burn in hell forever. The fact of the matter is that the Bible plainly teaches that hell was prepared for the devil and the fallen angels that rebelled and were cast down out of heaven and goes into vivid detail about the "smoke of their TORMENT ascending upwards day and night and how they shall have NO rest for ever and ever". Gee, ever and ever and torments, what are the implications there? Also, doesn't he also say that he made us slightly lower than the angels? I guess my question then would be this "If angels have hell 'prepared' for them and will be 'tormented' in those flames 'for ever and ever', then why is it so hard for anyone to grasp that God will allow us that same fate "IF WE WILLINGLY REJECT HIS PRECIOUS GIFT OF SALVATION"? No one is forced into hell, we have the option, the gift was offered to ALL mankind, and as a Baptist (and proud of it) we teach that IF you have "heard" the TRUE GOSPEL and "understood" what the plan of salvation is and have willfully "rejected" God's gift of his son, you will 'BURN IN HELL FOREVER' and my family was raised under Baptist teachings and have heard the truth, so, should I be concerned when I read these words found in the Bible in Hebrews 6, listen to what God is conveying in this passage:

5-And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6-If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put [him] to an open shame.

These two verses are why I wrestle over whether or not my mother and sister are saved and if they ever will be renewed in their original beliefs. I guess I will end with that thought and ask that you all continue to pray about this situation. I have been reading about how bad things can be turned into good and is centered around the truth of Romans 8:28. God is showing me now that had it not been for my sister getting so mad at me when I sent that web site about the lies of EGW that I would have never gone back and looked for the site and in doing so found you great folks who have been so informative and inspirational. Also, had it not been for the resistance of my family when I tried to lead them to the truth while exposing the lies that you all know are taught in the SDA church, I would probably never have felt a desire to read the New Testament and teachings of Paul over again. As always, the word heals and helps us to grow as we feed on it. I know now too that had I continued to be casual and never got challenged, I would have never been shown the many things that I wrote about in my web site, even the site is strange within itself. I got an e-mail that advertised that I could have my own web site as a very reasonable price and pay for it online and download the software and immediately begin to work on it. That is one thing that has kept me away from the forum so much lately. Guess that is both good and bad because you have all been so helpful, and I have seen how hurt you all have been and how you are even now enduring such grief at the hands of SDA family members that truly believe you are going to hell because you left the "remnant church". I don't know why they make such a deal about hell if they don't think it is an eternal abode of the wicked anyway. It is all so much "double-talk"!

Well, I Guess I have ranted enough for one session. I finally got my picture edited into the home page if any of you want to check out what this nutcase looks like. www.theLumpkinhome.com is the http, and I have started a page about apostasy too. I always want to know what everyone thinks about what I write, so, please e-mail me with your suggestions for subjects to teach on, but please be kind when you criticize, and hopefully you won't have a lot to be critical about.

God bless and have a great day.

Janice
Chris (Chris)
Posted on Tuesday, August 12, 2003 - 6:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Janice, you have many great comments and observations throughout your post above. I understand your exasperation with some of the aberant things printed by SDAs. If you really want to get torqued off, read "Our Solid Foundation" sometime. It's a periodical put out by really far right-wing (historic) SDAs. For what it's worth, the view that there is a certain continuity between the genetic sons of Abraham and the spiritual sons of Abraham is not unique to Adventism nor is it in anyway hetrodox (see Gal. 3:7). I would not want to lump non-dipensational evangelical Christians in with Adventist as I see this being a legitimate in-house debate among Christian believers.
Chris

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration