| Author | Message | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
Amen! | ||
| Susan_2 (Susan_2) |
Dear Freeatlast and Colleen, Yes, those were her exact words. "All they have is Jesus" and then that she wants to share with them the rest of the gosple which I was told is the truth of the Sabbath, the state of the dead and the health message. Kind-of warped, don't you agree? | ||
| Freeatlast (Freeatlast) |
Thanks, but I'll take my gospel plain and unadorned. Hold the whipped cream and nuts please. | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
I remember being aghast one day a couple or three years ago I was in a discussion about the gospel with a staunch Adventist family member. I mentioned that Paul said that he preached Christ and him crucified. My loved one replied, "That was present truth in his day." There's really nowhere to go next in a conversation like that! Colleen | ||
| Steve (Steve) |
Colleen's story reminds me of my first experience in the HEART of the CULT. New Mexico style, not the blissful, easygoing California attitude that I was familiar with. I was trying to figure which of the 7 SDA churches in the Albuquerque area I wanted to attend. I was visiting one church and attended a Sabbath school class. They were studying Leviticus and the Day of Atonement (it was the quarterly lesson; what a surprise they were studying such an UNUSUAL topic!) After quite a number of folks made statements about "how careful we must be" or "we may be living without a mediator, so we can't sin!" (I think there were a good dozen people in the class that had reached perfection, at least by their own reckoning.) I finally couldn't stand it anymore. I raised my hand, and quoted 1st John 2:1b "... but if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the righteous." I was immediately attacked from these apparently "perfect" people. The primary point they made that I couldn't stop thinking about extremely frequently was, "That was present truth for that time. We have a fuller revelation than they had then." I just shut up. Like Colleen says, there's really nowhere to go next in a conversation like that. I almost left the SDA church at that time. I had only been in for a few years, and was shocked at my experience at ALL of the SDA churches in the Albuquerque area. But alas, love [ex-wife] conquers all. She conquered my desire to look at other churches (as possible places of worship) for many years. But Love Himself conquered even that temporal love. Aint it amazing?! (Where does the apostrophe go in the word "aint?") Steve | ||
| Marykay (Marykay) |
This is just an amazing forum. You are all so part of my life right now. (actually I think I need a life)lol But I need to know why the church where my husband goes to for the past 3-4 years, maybe longer, has never sent us anything about how much he has paid into tithes. Seems a little unusual as I have always thought other denominations have always done this. When I ask husband, he says you have to ask the treasurer. As you can tell we have had some disagreement about tithes. I believe he thinks it saves him (works). Now don't get me wrong. I do believe in paying but if you are lacking in something that is more important like a debt or groceries I do believe those things are more important. How should I handle this one? Another question I have is that he brought this questionaire home from church from Loma Linda. What is that about? Should I be leery of this? Marykay | ||
| Loneviking (Loneviking) |
Hmmm, sending a statement out as to how much was paid in tithe is a federal requirement. So, if there's no statement then it could be that no money was paid in. I can't imagine either the University or Hill church not sending out a statement. As for the questionaire, what sort of questions are being asked? Loma Linda? Remember, Friday nights @ 7:30--Trinity E.V. Free on Resevoir Road in Redlands.... | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
Actually, it's 7:00 on Friday nights at Trinity, but thanks for putting out the invitation, Bill! See you there! Marykay, is the questionaire a health questionaire? It seems that I heard that Loma Linda is gathering research for its next phase of the Adventist Health Study. The Adventist Health Study is an ongoing project that compares Adventist longevity with that of the general population. It also compares lifestyle and diet and attempts to correlate increased longevity with a vegetarian diet, etc. The interesting thing is that Mormons generally have life spans equivalent to SDAs, and they eat meat. The similarity is that they do not smoke or drink (although many Adventists drink, at least in California!) I agree wtih Bill re: the financial statement. If his church isn't sending one, it's certainly unusual and is outside of the law; perhaps your husband has his held for him at church, or something like that? I'm glad you're with us, Marykay. Colleen | ||
| Lucias (Lucias) |
Steve said : 'After quite a number of folks made statements about "how careful we must be" or "we may be living without a mediator, so we can't sin!" (I think there were a good dozen people in the class that had reached perfection, at least by their own reckoning.)' Ha! That reminds me of the time I almost started got myself burned at the stake ( I'm only half sure thats tounge in cheek ) in SS one week for insinuating the head deacon sinned last week...... My comment was something to the effect of how we have all sinned to some degree or another and then I turned to him and said, conversationally, "I'm sure you can think of some sin you committed this week, I've sinned and I'm sure we all can think of something we've done." If you have never tried this I don't recommend doing it unless you have a clear path to the exit ;-) As I'm fond of saying : "SDA's do NOT believe in Salvation by works. SDA's do however believe in damnation by works". If you can't figure out what the difference in the two is, don't worry neither can I. But that is the crux. They believe in Salvation by faith, or so they claim, but at the same time there are specific things you can do, or fail to do, which are guarenteed to get you damned. To me its all the same thing. Lost by works = saved by works. 'Course thats why I wandered off the reservation a couple years ago now......... | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
Very good point, Lucias. That is the distinction many of them make. It's just not politically correct in evangleical circles to say one is saved by works. Being lost, on the other hand... Isn't it amazing and wonderful to be free? I've pondered recently the paradox that the nature of true freedom for a human being is to surrender oneself to total acceptance of intimacy with another person: the Lord Jesus. As long as one pursues freedom by maintining individuality, he is enslaved to himself. Give up oneself, however, to Jesus, and the freedom is inexpressible. Praise God! Colleen | ||
| Susan_2 (Susan_2) |
I attended the local sda church with my mother last Saturday. I would be courious if any others of you have noticed the total unreverrance in the sda churches? The local church has people walking in and out of the sancturary right during the sermon and the special music and occassionally even the prayer. Last week I had to turn around twice and tell the family behind me that this was a church, dedicated to God and they needed to be reverant in God's house. People let the little kids play in the isles and I have even seen some youth playing their Game Boys during the worship service. Then in the potluck following the service it has been my observation that everything is discussed except matters of holyness. If the Sabbath is so important to those folks then how come they are sitting at the potluck table on Saturday afternoons talking about and discussing everything from their retirement 401-K plans to having to take their cars to the mechanic the next week? It was so bad last week that I finilly wrote a note to the minister inviting him to attend the local Lutheran church that is my church home or a local Catholic church or the Prespertarian or wherever and he can observe for himself people who respect the House of the Lord. The only thing I have been able to surmise is that the sda's have shoved out the Holy Spirit and the result is chaos and irreverance inside the church building and the church grounds. Have any of you others noticed this? | ||
| Doug222 (Doug222) |
I am not sure I buy into the "reverance in God's house" argument anymore. Although I was raised singing the song, "The Lord is in His Holy Temple, let all the earth keep silent." I see no scriptural support for it. I do however think that there is a matter of common courtesy, which should cause people to be respectful of others when in a public worship service. Concerning the conversations go, I consider it be like food offered to idols. Since I do not believe in the idols, eating the food means nothing--although it may mean something to a weaker brother. The same applies to the Sabbath, although its interesting when the "weaker brother" doesn't even honor his own conscience. Remember that in the OT, God presence actually inhabited the Temple. There is no such parallel in the NT Church. God is omni-present, and therefore we should live our lives as if in the very presence of a Holy God. Doug | ||
| Janice (Janice) |
Hello again to everyone. I truly find it amazing when I hear someone say that we are being presumptuous when we say that we have been assured of our salvation. In light of the clear word of God that tells us that we CAN know in I John, I just don't understand why so many swallow camels as the religious leaders of old and strain at gnats like they do with the simplicity of the gospel. It just looks like a whole lot of WORK to be "religious" all the time. My alcoholic sister claims that the main reason that she isn't speaking to me is because I "hurt" two of the most "sainted" people that she has ever known in her life. She went on to say that mama and my other sister were "too nice" to "put me in my place" but that wasn't going to stop her from telling me just exactly what she thought of me and even went on to say that since I was such a hypocrite, she wanted nothing to do with hypocrites like me who "put down" GOOD people and made them feel bad for trying to live their lives pleasing to God. She ended her last letter, over a year ago, by saying that since I had chosen to take such a stand AGAINST our saintly mother and sister that she had decided to join the SDAs. Wow, I didn't think that people got saved to SPITE someone, did any of you? Of course, she didn't mention being saved, she just mentioned that she was joining the church. All through the New Testament, one of the key words found there is "FREEDOM" along with the word "LIBERTY", and I have to wonder why some folks think that I am saying that I can do any old thing that I want and still go to heaven. The truth is, of course, that when we do get the truth into our hearts and ask God to come and reside there, scripture plainly states that we are made a NEW creature, the old has passed away, we don't say that we are immediately perfect but scripture does assure us that at that very moment when we accept him "by faith", we are "saved" from eternal death even though our salvation is actually an ongoing thing. We get saved from death at the instant that Christ enters our hearts, we who believe in Christ have passed from death to life and will NEVER see death. The second death is no more than an eternal separation from God and is definitely not the aniliation that the SDAs teach. The second phase of our salvation is on a daily basis as we begin to live our lives by being sensitive to the Holy Spirit and growing in grace as we "study" the word, we have the Holy Spirit, the comforter to help us resist the temptations that Satan throws our way and lastly, we will eventually be saved from the very presence of evil when Satan and his angels are cast into the lake of fire along with all of those who have rejected the true gospel and are eventually told to depart because God NEVER knew them (not that you once got saved and then lived for the devil, he says plainly that he NEVER knew them) Well, back on the current subject. It is very clear to me that even the sainted Preacher Paul had his share of struggles against his own flesh when he spoke of doing the things that he didn't want and not doing the things that he knew he should, he explained that it was a war between the flesh and the spirit and referred to this demonic influence over him as his "thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan sent to buffet him" and to be honest, I truly believe that God has allowed E.G. White to be a messenger of Satan in order for all of us to clearly see (those, like you all, who want to seek the truth)that this woman and her false doctrines are clearly from the devil, and instead of bringing about the fruits of the Spirit and a UNITY of the faith, the SDAs have gone far above the realm of pride when they state that they have been "ear-marked" as God's chosen and true "remnant" church just because some nut came along and presented a false gospel over a hundred years ago. It is just like God says, "a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" (Galatians 5:9)and what that means is that like yeast, a tiny amount makes a lot of dough rise and swell. What a good analogy, huh? God does not favor a haughty and swelled up pride and continually calls us to be humble, the complete opposite to the way SDAs are brought up to believe. Well, once again, I am getting long winded on it for the uptenth time, I will drop it for now and pray that everyone has a wonderful weekend and hopefully gets to spend time in God's house whether it is on a Sabbath or on the Lord's Day. By the way, the Lord's Day is mentioned by John in the book of Revelations in chapter 1, verse 10. This should be in the rapture thread: I will go on record as saying that as far as the rapture goes, I love to discuss it with anyone that will listen to me (not my opinion but me as I relate the word of God about this subject)But I refuse to argue about it with anyone. I even had a man that referred to himself as Christian tell me that I shouldn't be trying to get him to read the RBC ministries because the books were written by men and then turned right around and stated that he had cassette tapes from "a man" that proved that the rapture was a hoax. Such foolishness isn't worthy of an answer as Colleen has already said. What is it about "answering a fool according to his folly?" It is useless and exasperating to argue over the rapture as we are plainly told not to argue on minor details that only serve to "gender strife" after all, it is not essential to the salvation message to believe in it one way or the other, right? We should just be trying to live our lives in a constant state of readiness so that we won't be caught in a compromising position. I try to think, what if he caught me up "right now", would I be able to hold my head up or hang it in shame? I will simply ask why anyone would want to try to talk us out of the belief that God is going to stay true to his word and keep us from the hour of temptation. If we study that chapter in detail (with Spiritual insight given by the Holy Ghost) we will read that this verse plainly says, as others have mentioned on the rapture thread, that the hour of temptation will come to ALL who dwell on the earth. Having said that, we must conclude that since God's children have been given this promise to be spared and in the same breath states that ALL who dwell ON THE EARTH will be touched with his wrath, well, just what other conclusion can we come to? They're many other scriptures can shed light on that truth as well and, as I have stated before, www.discoveryseries.com has gone to great lengths to give a full-coverage of All the facts concerning the difference between the rapture and the second coming of the Lord. This really "clears up" a lot of the problems that so many have with grasping this truth. My SDA sister says that it is cruel to state that the Jews will have to go through the tribulations since many Jews are Christian, but she totally misunderstood what I was trying to show her. What I wanted her to understand was this important fact: There have always been two types of Jews, ever since the crucifixion. Paul preached in the synagogues to the "Christian Jews" who were anxious to hear the gospel while at the same time, the religious Jews, who denied Jesus as the Christ, were trying to kill Paul because he was causing many to convert to Christianity and forsake the old Jewish customs (the law as Jesus taught was to come to an end)but they had hardened their hearts just like their forefathers who were destroyed in the wilderness and never crossed over to the promised land. The Exodus is an Old Testament "type-ology" of Jesus' saving grace in the New Testament. God "led them out of bondage" and set them free but they complained every step of the way. They tried Moses on a daily basis until he went to Sinai to ask direction from the Lord. They were a stiff-necked and hardened people (their pride was what destroyed them)The law was given to Moses to help the people see just how filthy they were, the law was a mirror to reveal the wicked nature of man, and the law was not given with the condition that IF you obey, you will "earn" your salvation. No, he promised them material wealth "on earth" IF they would recognize him as the one who provided for them in the wilderness and be willing to humble themselves before an awesome God. How sad to think that these people lived "under the cloud" of God Almighty and still refused to honor him with all the daily evidence of his continual love and protection. Just imagine how wide the Red Sea must have spread open just to let all those thousands of people cross over in one night's time. It was estimated by some to be several miles wide in order for all of them to travel the distance across in one night. I will try to include some details later on this subject. Just like today's SDAs, they had a prideful heart that refused to be humbled, and God is NOT through with the orthodox, non-Christian Jews yet. He plainly said that he would use US Christians to provoke HIS people to jealousy and would do so until "the fulness of the Gentiles" so, in other words, until all of us Gentiles that are going to respond to the gospel actually do so, the rapture will NOT occur. At such a time as a man thinketh not, I COME, so, shouldn't we be ready as he commands? Who knows, the very next person that you help lead to Christ may be that last Gentile before we get "snatched away" so as our redemption draweth nigh and is at the door and knocking, let's be ready to preach the gospel and be able to stand and proclaim why we have such a hope!!! So much emphasis is placed on the word "COMMANDMENTS" without ever stopping to consider (I speak to the SDAs here)that the big "10" that they continually harp on are NOT the ONLY commands that God gives to us in his word. Does not God say in Matthew 17:25- While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; HEAR YE HIM. I will end this post with that thought which is a command. We need to be listening to Jesus whose purpose in life (described in the four gospels)was to seek and to save those that are LOST. Knock, seek, and ask of the Lord, he is a friend that will stick with you when all others forsake you. We as children of God are never truly alone. We need no other book than the "word that became flesh and dwelt among us" to lead us into all spiritual truth. When we have the spirit of Christ abiding in us, we will have no need in anyone showing us the road of salvation, we have that in God's word too. You don't TEACH someone HOW to be saved, you present the gospel and the Holy Spirit does the rest, so, if the word tells me that all things are made clean in Christ and nothing to be refused IF accepted with thanksgiving, then isn't that saying that God ACCEPTS "ALL" who come to him in a simple childlike faith? Any other gospel is NO gospel at all, amen? I have been accepted and made clean by God, I am offended at anyone who dares to tell me that just because I don't visit the church on a Saturday morning that I am taking the mark of the beast, this is ludricrous to say the least. My Bible teaches me that WE (God's children, ALL OF US who have received Christ)will not be snatched out of the hand of God or taken out of the hands of Christ, so, I will continue to pray for my misguided SDA family as you do yours. God bless you and good night. Janice Janice | ||
| Cindy (Cindy) |
Doug, I also believe that "reverence" can be promoted in a way that goes against the Spirit of Christ. I think that the designation between "sacred" and "secular" is a problem. For me, all times and places are sacred because God is there. He says he will never leave me. I always want to live in His Presence! Obviously, we do need respect and consideration for the speaker, singer, etc. in a church setting. And we surely can feel and sense the wonder and awesome power of God more at certain times.... But this is something far different than saying a building has some inherent quality of "holiness". Interestingly, Stephen, when brought before the Sanhedrin with the accusation, "This fellow never stops speaking against this holy place and against the law..." replied back to them with a history of God's dealings with the Israelites; the tabernacle of the Testimony in the desert and later, the Temple that Solomon built. Then Stephen said, "However, the Most High does not live in houses made by men...." I know EGW makes a big deal of "reverence in the sanctuary" in her writings. I don't remember all the specific quotes, but I remember it was quite a major emphasis at one church we were at with quotes of hers given out to to try to enforce this "reverence"... This included the time even after the church service. You are not to have small talk in "the sanctuary". (might drift to something "secular", you know! But you must go out to the foyer to converse. To me this is so old testamental and really ridiculous! Grace always, Cindy | ||
| Doug222 (Doug222) |
Cindy, I'm lol, because I too remember being instructed to take conversations out in the foyer, which didn't really make sense. Afterall, if you weren't supposed to have secular conversations on the Sabbath, indeed you weren't even supposed to let your thoughts drift, then it really shouldn't make a difference whether you were in the sanctuary or not. Does that mean that being in the Sanctuary on the Sabbath constituted "extra holiness?" If so, then what does being in the sanctuary, during the 11:00 (divine worship) hour, on the Sabbath mean? Whoa, that must be more holy than the ground around the burining bush <smile> I say this tongue in cheek, but the reality of the matter is I really believed it. Somehow, the sanctuary was different (more "special") on during the 11:00 hour than during Sabbath School, and certainly much more holy than on Wednesday evening. Where did we get this stuff anyway? Thanks for giving me the opportunity to laugh at myself. Doug | ||
| Melissa (Melissa) |
My church has "rules", or worship etiquette, listed in our bulletin that requests parents of small children to put them in the nursery so they don't disrupt the service. (Our church's children's workers go through background screenings through the SRS and the Bureau of Investigation as well as training to make sure there are qualified and safe people working with our kids. There is an extensive security system to check children in and only if you have the security tag that matches your child can you remove a child from the nursery (actually, through 5th grade). During services, the nursery doors are locked as a further safeguard for our children. Isn't it sad the measures we have to go to in today's society? All that to say, we take the care of our children during services very seriously and want all parents to feel it is a safe place for their kids. There is also a nursing mothers room with sofas, rockers, changing tables, cribs and a closed circuit tv of the service trying to meet those special needs. Also, if someone takes a small child into the service that becomes disruptive and the parent/adult does not take the child out voluntarily, one of our ministerial staff will go to that person and ask them to take the child to a nursery. Or they can sit in the foyer where there are closed circuit tvs of the service. Likewise, he asks that people not move in the aisles except for an emergency and to sit in the back when they return, turn off cell phones and pagers for our "appointment with God". Our pastor's thoughts are that there may be someone in the service who is hearing the gospel for the first time and contemplating eternally significant things. It may be the only time they come into a church service and God may be working with someone, while a small child or other disruptions may take the person's mind away from the Holy Spirit. Or if people are moving up and down the aisle, he's concerned visitors will think we don't take God very seriously or minimize the significance and importance of our worship time and ultimately the message being given. B said that is all wrong. He said that if God's really speaking to someone, no child is going to distract him and the children should be in the service, screaming and crying or not, to learn how to worship correctly. He even thinks it is wrong for elementary age kids to be in their own service with a lesson that is appropriate to their age and understanding. To him, the worship service is primarily for believers (church members) and it seems seekers who might wander in are the afterthought. It's not that our services are totally seeker oriented. Our members are well-fed, whether spiritual babe or senior. But we do want to make the environment as ripe as possible for all to hear the voice of God with as few external disruptions as possible at an age-appropriate level. That's the goal, anyway. To me, it is not that the sanctuary is a "holy" place, but because there are hopefully lost people there hearing the gospel. I've seen kids with gameboys, but I'm not sure why that is really any different than a kid coloring or drawing or reading a library book. From my experience as a child, I paid attention in children's church because the message was at a level I understood and in a delivery format that caught my attention, but when I stayed in "big church", I thought it was boring. So, is the goal for the kid to learn something about God or to learn church is "boring"? That's my personal opinion, for what it's worth. My son loves going to church. He has learned things I didn't know because he's listening, not trying to stay awake like I did when I sat in "big church". Isn't that related to what Paul talks about when he says he becomes all things to all people to win some? Wouldn't he become like a child to win a child? I guess it just depends upon what the purpose of the worship service is and who the audience is. I don't think others are wrong. I know people who enjoy formal services with organ music and lots of silence. I know people who like lots of amens, praise-the-Lords and drums. God's not looking at the externals of our worship, but the internal heart of the worshippers. (I think Dennis talks about internal/external in the "soul" thread. I think it fits this topic too.) If my worship is sincerely from the heart, I think he honors it's delivery method. As I said, it's my opinion for what it's worth. | ||
| Melissa (Melissa) |
I do have a challenge, however, on the original name of this thread "anger and frustration". When I find out someone is an Adventist, this "prejudice" (for lack of a better word) wells up inside of me. I instantly get defensive and think of sarcastic remarks to any topic they bring up. Christ cannot possibly be honored by those feelings, nor can he use me with that mind-set. How have you dealth with such feelings, presuming I'm not totally unusual. | ||
| Terryk (Terryk) |
I am right there with you sister. I was talking to afriend who was sick and she believes that God was healing her cause the church was praying for her on the sabbath day. I have not gotton to the point of red flashes that come to my mind yet. Maybe others have but I am not there yet. I see they are having a meeting of course not at their church and never with their name I want to go out and picket. The thing with the kids in church that is a SDA thing there again make everyone as miseralbe as you can. Its better to have your child taking up a pew and eatting and playing then sending him to another class. I used to point out the Jesus did not go to Tem;e til he was 12. | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
I understand your feelings, Melissa. I suspect that part of their intensity comes from the fact that B's Adventism actively poses a certain threat to your family. As you begin to resolve your dilemma about him and about his role in your and your child's life, Adventism will seem less of an immediate threat. While I feel no less strongly about the deception of Adventism than I used to, (in fact, I might feel even more strongly about it as time goes on), it doesn't have the same intense emotional hook on me that it used to have. When we asked God to replace the spirit of Adventism with the Holy Spirit in our hearts, my intense emotions about explaining it and making people understand and needing the Adventists I knew to understand my position dissipated to a great degree. You'll probably always feel passionate about the subject, Melissa, but as God heals your heart and brings you to a place where you know what God expects you to do about Adventism in your own family, you may find that the intense anger will give way to clear rational conviction. Keep asking God to make clear to you what you should do and to heal your heart with his love and truth. I continue to pray for you and also for your boyfriend. Colleen | ||
| Susan_2 (Susan_2) |
Colleen, since I know you got those books and brochures I sent I would like for you to fimd some of the more outrageous statements in them and bring those statements to the discussion, especially some of the things written in the Amazing Facts pamphlet on diet. I would do it myself except that I don't have any more of that literature to refer to. |
