Archive through October 21, 2005 Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Former Adventist Fellowship Forum » ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS 4 » Purpose driven life... » Archive through October 21, 2005 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz

Post Number: 944
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 10:20 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Melissa, I didn't see your post before posting mine, so hopefully having this extensive document will be helpful. I agree that we shouldn't accept rumor, so that is why I just posted what I have been reading. Not everyone will have the same interpretation as I do, but that is why I enjoy everyone on this forum and their contributions.

Stan
Tisha
Registered user
Username: Tisha

Post Number: 151
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 11:08 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Thank-you Melissa for stating, so much more elegantly than I could, the thoughts I was trying to convey. I just don't seem to things get out of my mind and onto paper in a very logical way. I appreciate your posts.

And Stan, I value your posts and insights about the research you have been doing. As Melissa also said, I don't have the time to study as in depth as you do and so the posts are helpful. I have only seen the results of the PDL in our Church and I have found it to be helpful in deepening our Christian walk, our Church community, and our outreach to the rest of our community. These are the fruits I see and have only seen good come of it. I cannot speak for any others experience.

-tisha
Pheeki
Registered user
Username: Pheeki

Post Number: 676
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:05 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Help. I have been over posting on www.revivalsermons.org and I cannot believe what I am up against. I simply told them that I had assurance I was saved and wow!!! It made them so mad.

Why would that make a fellow Christian mad? Of course I got the old "the devil believes and trembles..." I can't stand it over there...but I hope to pierce the darkness with a little of the Gospel.
Heretic
Registered user
Username: Heretic

Post Number: 206
Registered: 2-2005
Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 2:51 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Pheeki, which thread? I'm having a hard time finding it. Thanks.

Heretic
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa

Post Number: 1132
Registered: 7-2003


Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 3:24 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Stan, I'm just leaving work for the day and probably won't have time to get to that post until tomorrow some time. But I'll check it out. I truly appreciate the respectful way you handle our disagreements and varying opinions. I learn a lot from you and probably don't say so enough. Thanks, too, Tisha for your kind words. That's just the way God made me :-).
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b

Post Number: 325
Registered: 7-2004


Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 6:13 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Perhaps what bothers me most in the discussion about RW and PDL is that I hear the same arguments that are used to justify EGW and SDAism. "Look at how much the church has grown compared to others", "there is so much good in her writings, why do you always have to focus on the negatives", "why can't you focus more on love than on divisions in the church", and "look at how many people have been blessed by reading her books." If I were going to accept these as reasonable supportive arguments, why not stay SDA? Either it matters whether the Gospel is spokenly plainly and accurately, or it doesn't. Stan if your description of RW stating that the next reformation is about our deeds, I've already been there and done that (and have the emotional scars to prove it). I have no interest in going back into that pit.
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady

Post Number: 1938
Registered: 3-2004


Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 6:56 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Heretic,
The thread Pheeki is posting on is the one about the Investigative Judgement. A bunch of us posted over there earlier this year and when it was found out we were former SDAs and used only the Bible and did not believe EGW, we were banned.
Some of the folks that are posting are some of the ones that posted against us and some are new.
Pheeki, Please do not feel bad if the people on the O'FFil site are nasty to you. It is God they do not understand and that is who they are against, so do not take it personal.
You saying you are saved goes against everything an SDA believes. We know that when we accept Jesus Christ we are saved, but the SDA has to work to make themselves perfect and even then they have no assurance of salvation, because of the IJ.
According to the IJ, we will not know if we are saved until we are actually in heaven, or something like that. I thank God I do not have to work my way into God's Grace. Jesus did all that for me and all I have to do is love him and let Him work through me. Hallelujah, Jesus is mine. He is awesome.
Diana
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz

Post Number: 945
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 7:55 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ric_b, I want to be as fair and accurate as possible, but frankly I am concerned by his rhetoric. I am bothered that he speaks negatively of the reformation where Luther hammered out those 95 theses. So many of us have been blessed by realizing that salvation is completely outside of ourselves. For Dr.Warren to speak to this group of media elites, and say that the first reformation only divided people, and now we need a second reformation to bring everyone together, that frankly troubles me. Maybe I am just paranoid, but I don't see what darkness (Catholicism) and light have in common. If RCC is a Christian religion, then so is Adventism--there is no other way to be honest with the facts and say otherwise.
Can anyone give me any evidence that Catholicism has changed? Oh contrare, the current Vicar of Christ (Does that not sound like a blasphemous title for a pope) has affirmed the Council of Trent which pronounced ANATHEMA--curses to the most damning degree--on Luther and Calvin, or anyone who would hold that we are justified by faith thru Christ alone. As I say, How can the vast majority of popular Christianity be so blind and ignorant about RCC? And, those leaders who are compromising with Catholicism do know better. To me, the faith of the Reformers, and the gospel Paul preached is too valuable to compromise with a gospel that Paul declared to be false in Gal. 1:8,9.

Stan
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b

Post Number: 326
Registered: 7-2004


Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 9:01 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

IMO, True Christianity stands or falls on the question of justification by faith alone. Every false religion, and every false gospel taught under the guise of Christianity has one thing in common, it hinges on the efforts and works of man rather than the free gift of God. Any mixing of our works into the equation negates the gift and makes it something that we are earning (even if we are being WAY overpaid for what we contribute). Blurring the truth of the Gospel in order to unite people is not the way of Scripture.
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker

Post Number: 2757
Registered: 12-2003


Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 10:29 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I actually agree with you, Rick and Stan. I do not wish to slur true Christians who are committed to making Christ known, and after reading the link from Pew Forum, Stan, I believe that RW has had a life-long commitment to Jesus.

I know , though, how easy it is to begin ever so slightly to lose focus of "Jesus and Him crucified" and spend energy on adjucnt efforts that are not opposed to the cross but might demand more and more attention. While I am not prepared to say that RW has "gone off the deep end", because I truly can't know exactly what's going on inside his head, still I was also disturbed by his statements about the Reformation and the "new reformation" of good deeds which would link denominations.

It's the sort of thing I want to be aware of, to watch, and not simply to embrace because I think I trust someone. I believe that all of us are vulnerable to being caught up in a "cult of personality", and we can almost without noticing become seduced into personal compromise if we begin to trust a person we admire rather than subjecting everything to the word of God.

Doctrinal and spiritual compromise can begin very subtlely. I often pray that God will protect me from deception, both deception from things outside and deception from my own head and heart.

I completely agree that true Christianity stands or falls on the question of justification by faith alone, and that blurring the gospel in order to unite people is not the way of Scripture.

I am not disparaging any worship style or a "seeker-friendly" consciousness. I praise God for working through countless congregations who have presented Jesus to people who wouldn't have attended traditional churches.

But what we believe really does matter. Jude knew what he was saying when he admonished, "I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints" (Jude :3).

If our humanitarian efforts aren't intimately connected to teaching Jesus and His sacrifice and resurrection, we're likely doing our own good works instead of the work of God. Last Monday the wife of a Mission Aviation Fellowship pilot spoke briefly to our Monday night women's Bible study group. They are in a country where Christianity is illegal, and they can only be there as commercial contractors. Yet every place they go, every contact they make, is an opening contact for the gospel. The wife is teaching at a school where women are learning to read. Even though she is teaching geography, this young woman is openly teaching the gospel to these Muslim women as she discusses the religions of the different countries of the world.

When she spoke of prayer requests when the couple was interviewed in church on Sunday she said, "Safety is an issue, [and if you knew the country they were in, you would certainly agree], but what we really want prayer for is that we will be able to clearly proclaim the gospel."

The real issue is really not "people helped" (as the old Sabbath School witnessing reports used to say). The real issue is how clearly the true gospel of Jesus is being proclaimed. Humanitarian efforts are essential, but if organizing the growth of the effort overtakes the focus of proclaiming the true gospel to the "people helped," we've compromised our efforts.

Just my thoughts...

Colleen

Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz

Post Number: 946
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 11:10 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

It looks like the Pew forum link got archived, so I will post it again www.pewforum.org/events/index.php?EventID=80

I can't judge the heart of RW either. I will have to take at face value what he says about his basic belief system. I know this document is long, but what is conspicuous by its absence in Dr. Warren's statements is any statement of the doctrine of justification by faith alone. Sadly by his desire to put down Luther's Reformation as being divisive, he seems to be logically denying the most important and basic truth of the gospel.
It is very subtle, but there are other statements he makes that are also troubling. But, it is very clear from that document, that Dr. Warren will be the leading voice in popular Christianity for a long time. It is going to be very interesting to watch.

Stan
Heretic
Registered user
Username: Heretic

Post Number: 207
Registered: 2-2005
Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 11:41 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Stan and Ric, after reading the Pew article I, too, find it disturbing. It really is amazing how much power RW has obtained through the writing of this book. He made a number of comments that give me pause, some of which were very favorable to the Catholic church, the most formidable foe of "righteousness by faith alone," all in the name of unity. For instance:

quote:

And, you know, growing up as a Protestant boy, I knew nothing about Catholics, but I started watching ETWN, the Catholic channel, and I said, "Well, I'm not as far apart from these guys as I thought I was, you know?


Colleen said it well,"Doctrinal and spiritual compromise can begin very subtly." Here is the comment regarding the reformation:

quote:

You know, 500 years ago, the first Reformation with Luther and then Calvin, was about beliefs. I think a new reformation is going to be about behavior. The first Reformation was about creeds; I think this one will be about deeds. I think the first one was about what the church believes; I think this one will be about what the church does.

The first Reformation actually split Christianity into dozens and then hundreds of different segments. I think this one is actually going to bring them together.


So the Reformation was a negative?

Heretic
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b

Post Number: 327
Registered: 7-2004


Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 6:23 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Colleen, Once again you have described my reaction better than I can. I am not suggesting that we must insist on "doctrinal purity". I'm not even sure we could find two people here who agree 100% with each other on all doctrines. But I think that there are some basic elements of the Gospel that must be maintained. I hope people will understand that I am not questioning or judging how genuine any blessing is that they have gained through Rick Warren. I have been blessed by articles or books by authors' and still found serious issues with their theology and their gospel in other places. But the nugget of truth that they did present was still valuable and a blessing to me.
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa

Post Number: 1134
Registered: 7-2003


Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 8:39 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

http://www.purposedrivenlife.com/absolutenm3/templates/articles.aspx?articleid=1224&zoneid=38

You can read the whole article, but in terms of "gospel" ....

..." Then there is spiritual fruit, and that's what God is talking about in Galatians 5:22-23, "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self control." These nine qualities describe the character of a fruitful, productive Christian.

The question is: how do we get these character qualities? Obviously, God doesn't just zap me one day and all of a sudden these qualities materialize in my life. He uses a process. In this article we'll look at that process.

It's a Partnership

The Apostle Paul describes the two-part process God uses in Philippians 2:12-13 where he first says, "Work out your salvation" and then turns around and says, "It is God who works in you." It sounds like a contradiction, doesn't it? But it isn't. It's a paradox.

The key to understanding this paradox is the little word "out" in verse 12. Notice that Paul doesn't say "Work 'for' your salvation." That's a big difference. To work "for" something means to earn it, to deserve it, to merit it. The Bible clearly teaches that salvation is not something we have to work for. It is a free gift of God's grace. Paul says, "Work out your salvation." Paul is talking about a "spiritual workout." ....

This article from August 2005 seems to clearly say salvation is a gift of God grace ... you can read the rest of the article to see if his analysis of developing the fruit of the spirit in your life is in line with orthodoxy. But this is his chance to speak on any topic, unedited.

From his church's beliefs statement:

"ABOUT SALVATION
Salvation is a gift from God to man. Man can never make up for his sin by self-improvement or good works. Only by trusting in Jesus Christ as God¥s offer of forgiveness can man be saved from sin¥s penalty. Eternal life begins the moment one receives Jesus Christ into his life by faith.
Romans 6:23; Ephesians 2:8,9; John 14:6, 1:12; Titus 3:5; Galatians 3:26; Romans 5:1


ABOUT ETERNAL SECURITY
Because God gives man eternal life through Jesus Christ, the believer is secure in salvation for eternity. Salvation is maintained by the grace and power of God, not by the self-effort of the Christian. It is the grace and keeping power of God that gives this security.
John 10:29; 2 Timothy 1:12; Hebrews 7:25; 10:10,14; 1 Peter 1:3-5"


I don't think either of those resemble a false gospel. It is questionable to compare him with EGW who said you can't go to heaven if you eat meat or that you are sealed by sabbathkeeping.
Chris
Registered user
Username: Chris

Post Number: 1019
Registered: 7-2003


Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 10:59 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I find this discussion of Roman Catholic (RC) and Evangelical unity quite interesting. I would like to share a few thoughts with you that flow out of a recent experience.

I invited two PhD level professors from a local RC seminary over to my home one evening. One teaches Biblical Languages and the other Patristic Literature. These gentlemen have a friend who was once RC and has converted to Adventism. They had also attended a SDA Revelation seminar and confronted the evangelist publicly on some of his statements. They had requested more information on SDA issues and we met for that purpose.

I found these gentlemen to be highly intelligent, articulate, and polite. They were exceptionally astute at analyzing SDA issues and pointing out the various fallacies and inconsistencies. However, as the conversation turned to RC versus Reformation topics I found it most interesting that they were unable to apply the same kind of critical thought to RC dogma that they had so effectively applied SDA dogma.

Our debate was very civil and yet there was earnest passion on both sides. I respect the passion, conviction, and intelligence of these men very much even while adamantly disagreeing with their conclusions. We debated nearly all the great ìsolasî of the Reformation. Clearly they considered each and every ìsolaî to be anathema. For instance, they were nearly derisive of Lutherís insistence upon sola fide. Although they would agree that we are saved by faith, they would strongly disagree that we are saved by faith *alone*. They simply believe that the word ìaloneî is and addition that is foreign to scripture and Church teaching and that Luther just got it wrong. They also strongly disagree with sola scriptura. They do not believe that the authority of scripture can be separated from the authority of church tradition. The two go hand in hand and are inseparable. The list could go on.

What amazed me the most was the many similarities to Adventism in the denials of the Reformation solas and in particular in the area of soteriology. There were also two other striking similarities. The use of out of context proof-text linked to other unrelated texts to prove doctrine is as strong in the RC tradition as it is in Adventism. Listening to the ìbiblicalî rationale for the forgiving of sins by priest via the authority of the Church was really quite amazing. It was an exercise in proof-texting that fell only slightly short of Investigative Judgment proofs. The final similarity I noted was insistence on RC being the one true Church. Apart from the RC Church one is not fully in communion with God and His Church.

We ended the evening as friends. The conversation was lively and adamant, but always polite. I enjoyed the intellectual duel very much and would like to engage in a similar conversation again. However, I came away from the conversation with a renewed conviction that RC is completely incompatible with evangelical Christianity. The two systems are mutually exclusive because they directly contradict each other in the essentials. These are not non-essential items like the mode of baptism, eschatology or Church ecclesiology. These are the core essentials of Christianity that get to the very heart of the Gospel, the work of Jesus Christ, salvation, and faith. These are non-negotiables. No bridge is long enough or strong enough to span this divide because the gulf between us is the very question of what Jesus Christ did for us at the cross and what it means to us today. The gulf between us is the very nature of the Gospel.

I am saddened beyond words that two large groups who claim the name of Jesus, RCs and evangelicals, are not able to be in unity. It truly makes my heart ache as I believe Godís does as well. Yet, the cost of unity cannot come at the expense of the work of Christ and the Gospel He brought. That is no unity at all. True Christian unity can only be found in the true Gospel of scripture.

Lest these words sound too harsh, let me end with this observation. I work at a RC healthcare facility. At this facility I experienced the love of Christ and faith in action for the first time. I was amazed at the people who would sacrifice for others and care for those in need. I was a recipient of this care at one point. I was amazed at the commitment to social justice and to compassion. I saw people for the first time that wanted to dedicate their lives to doing the works of service that Christ performed while on earth. It was a life changing experience for me and one that contributed to my exit from Adventism.

RC is full of caring, committed, loving, sincere individuals who truly want to serve Christ and be more like him. Unfortunately, most have been born and raised in a false system that sold them a bill of goods which warps the Gospel. I love the individuals, but critique the system as a system.

To use a metaphor that has been much on my mind as of late, RC is full of people who want desperately to be sailors and yet they have been born and raised in the dark hold of the ship never seeing light. Those of us that have at long last discovered the light cannot sit back and pretend that the dark hold is no different then the light of the deck. Rather we should be praying for the opportunity and power to reach those in the dark. As God grants us opportunities we need to be prepared to throw open the hatch and let the light pour into darkness. Let us not forget that some of those who are in the dark are already our Christian brothers and sisters. They are sincere yet sincerely deceived. Let us take every opportunity to allow them to see the Light that they might come to know the Captain more fully.

I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me,

Chris Lee
Lincoln, NE
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz

Post Number: 947
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 4:35 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Chris, Welcome back! I loved your parable in the latest Proclamation and it details both SDAs as well as RCC experience. I just recently heard a tape by Johm MacArthur that I am offering to make available to anyone on this forum who asks and gets my email address from Colleen. I had found myself becoming soft on RCC, and I didn't believe that the papacy could be the antichrist, but now I have to believe it is very possible. MacArthur details what Luther and Spurgeon taught about this, and you can see where EGW copied from these people to get the papal antichrist idea. But there is so much other documentation, that it should wake up everyone with regard to current evangelical leaders compromising with this false religion. But the tape will remind you of what SDA is like also.

Stan
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker

Post Number: 2761
Registered: 12-2003


Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 5:03 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Chris, good to hear from you again! Thanks for sharing your experience and observations. Great insights.

Colleen
Tisha
Registered user
Username: Tisha

Post Number: 152
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 6:08 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Speaking of hearing from someone - where's Jeremy? I miss his posts.

Jeremy - I hope all is well with you. Maybe you're busy moving or on vacation?

Hope to see you back soon - tisha
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz

Post Number: 949
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 11:02 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I am thinking right now about Chris's article in the latest Proclamation with it's exciting message of being free of our chains, and we find out that the Captain really wants us to be free of those chains and up on the deck where the Light truly is found. I think also of the freedom and joy I found in Christ over 20 years ago, when my heart was freed of those chains, and I then discovered the wonderful joy Martin Luther discovered about the truth that we are forever justified by the imputed righteousness of Christ alone, and it didn't matter if I ever kept another Sabbath in my life! It is that freedom and joy that sets the heart free to love and serve his fellow man.

Then I go back and look at that quote Heretic posted above and I really think about what this guru of popular Christianity and now also a recognized world leader with many of the heads of state flocking to see him (that is not bad in itself, BTW) is saying about the reformation of 500 years ago, well I have to confess I am a little angry. Just think about what that statement is saying--that Reformation led by Luther and Calvin was about beliefs and creeds! Oh, Dr. Warren, is that really true? What about all the martyrs who were burned at the stake? What about William Tyndale who was burned by the RCC for the simple crime of translating the Bible into English? Was that only about creeds? What about the life transforming power that swept over Europe when the all important gospel of grace alone was rediscovered by these great reformers? What about all the wonderful deeds that sprang forth from those new creeds?

Folks, I could go on and on about this, and maybe we have spent too much time on this already, but it is the true gospel of Jesus Christ which is at stake here. As I asked on a previous post which was archived, "what gospel is this massive Global Peace Plan that RW is proposing that is going to unite Catholics and evangelicals going to preach?" Is it going to be the gospel of RCC-SDA which is faith plus works, and you can never have assurance of salvation gospel? Is it going to be Mary worship? Will it include purgatory? I see no way that it could be the true gospel of Jesus. There is no way to have fellowship light with darkness, but maybe RW can find a way to make that happen also.

Just because RW has an orthodox belief statement on his web site, doesn't make me trust what he is actually doing. I can point you to a lot of official SDA web sites that have orthodox belief statements on paper, but they don't mean very much. All I am saying is we need to test the spirits, and be a Berean (Acts 17) and see if these things be true.

Stan
Belvalew
Registered user
Username: Belvalew

Post Number: 709
Registered: 7-2004
Posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 1:10 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The Presbyterian church that I attend held a church-wide study of PDL, and most of the people were very excited about every little bit of it. It seemed to me that I was the only one who was alerted by the seeming works-based statements that RW had made in that book. It was amazing to me that I could so willingly read some of the book, and face other parts of it with such dread. I guess I'm still working my way past all of the old SDA programming. Many Christian denominations who profess righteousness by faith still are having a dance-around-the-edges romance with the old covenant, and I see it as being the basic human unwillingness to surrender and simply wait for God to make the changes that are required in each of us. It is only human to want to "help out." However, God doesn't need our help to do something he has already done. He only asks us to "stand." Standing is representative of faith, of active surrender. Sometimes it requires guts to simply stand and allow someone else to do the work.

Anyway, I made comments to that effect while we were doing the PDL study with our small group. I'm sure I'm not the only person who would have seen that. Still, there were others who would simply let the "works" comments keep right on passing through the study. It is not a salvational issue, though. It only restricts one's joy while waiting upon the Lord. The more I learn about Gospel, the more I realize that we are only required to surrender. Surrender is difficult, but once you really get what it means to surrender, it sets you free.

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