| Author | Message | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1266 Registered: 10-2004  |
Rick, You wrote: "If your idea of a truce is to return to proclaiming SDAism a 'satanic cult' unchallenged and to attack any person with the slightest difference of view in this regard..." What Colleen said yesterday is that we should all be able to post our opinions/beliefs on this forum without being attacked, and that the debate should take place in one specific thread. Jeremy | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1654 Registered: 3-2005 |
When I said amen to Chris last night, I was agreeing with him that there are more important issues in the big scheme of things to discuss, but, along with Ric_b I consider this discussion still of great importance. I have seen so many unfair attacks on Adventism during the last five weeks, that it stretched any credulity. Also my amen statement made last night was an expression that to a certain extent I have become weary of this conversation, but I feel it must be ongoing. I wish I had a lot more time to devote to this topic. There is so much more I want to say. My day job keeps me from doing some of the research I want to do. I even feel I need to visit some area SDA churches so I can do more adequate research. Also I plan to pursue an independent study of some of the medical aspects of EGW's behavior. What I do know of Bipolar illness as a physician does make me very suspicious that she indeed might have been so afflicted. That is why I blame SDA leaders, and I agree that the SDA system at the top is not a true evangelical church. Stan | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 526 Registered: 7-2004  |
Jeremy, Does that mean that you will only talk about SDAism being a satanic cult in this thread? That this is the only thread where you will question the Christianity of anyone who believes they might be called to stay in the SDA church and witness the Gospel there? That this is the only thread where you will tell us how no single SDA pastor ever has been able to speak the true Gospel? Or are you only suggesting that my comments disagreeing with you need to stay on this thread? | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3949 Registered: 12-2003  |
Hey, guysóthere's no need to be defensive! I actually understand where both viewpoints are coming from; I fall on one side personallyóbut I see no need to divide with those who see it differently. I have such respect for all of you who have practiced integrity in your lives and embraced the Lord Jesus and His revealed Word. I don't mean to sound condescending, but for some reason I'm feeling a bit like I used to on car trips when the boys were young and had carved out their own "space" in the back seat. One or the other would purposefully but subtly put a toe or a finger across the "line", and the fight was on. I was forever turning around and saying "DON'T TOUCH EACH OTHER!" The analogy's not perfectówe shouldn't have to refrain ever from mentioning the other's opinion. I see value in this discussion, but not when it becomes personal. The issue isn't EACH OTHERóit's an organization which, as far as I can tell, none of us identifies with any more. How crazy is it for us to divide over something we all agree is false and deceptive? And while I'm at it I want to make one more comment. The issue here isn't individual pastors or people. Examining the people and congregations will not prove anything about the denomination. The church is not defined by its individual pastors or congregations, and we're totally missing the picture to try to prove anything about the church by analyzing a few individuals. There's simply no good purpose served by bringing up names and people and apologists and detractors, etc. The issue here is not those people or their reputations. The issue is the beliefs and practices of the SDA organization. Those individual people do not define the organization. They simply serve as part of its presentation. I really have seen value in this coversation, but please keep it impersonal. No one here will be thought less of if others disagree with you. If it continues to be defensive and self-protective (which a discussion about Adventism of all things, shouldn't have to beóespecially here!), we'll ask you to take the discussion off line. Remember the "forum rules": When writing your messages, please use the same courtesy that you would show when speaking face-to-face with someone. Flames, insults, and personal attacks will not be tolerated. Posts may also be removed if the forum moderator believes that the message falls outside the scope of this web site. The owners of this web site reserve the right to remove your permission to post at any time. Please read the Terms and Conditions before posting on the forum. Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you. Ephesians 4:29-32 (NIV) Hey, we're truly brothers and sisters. Don't touch each other!! Colleen | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1655 Registered: 3-2005 |
Colleen, I respect what you said with the reminders. But it is interesting that I have been looking at that Ephesians 4 text above, and I am wondering if some of the language used to describe the SDA church just might possibly grieve the Holy Spirit if indeed the Holy Spirit is still working in some churches? That is a concern that struck me on a very personal level when I was convicted that some of my past statements on SDA needed to be repudiated. Also, if charges against an individual are thrown around loosely, and without documentation, then it may border on gossip or even slander. I am possibly guilty party number one on some of these points, but I only express it as a concern. For example, using the term "Satanic Cult" for an entire denomination just may be what some of us would consider irresponsible, and I question how this helps in building up the body of Christ, and especially how it helps with witnessing to our SDA friends and family, who just might come across this website and want to examine the false foundations of Adventism more closely. I unerstand very well the need to vent about an organization, as I still do remember the days that I would have loved to have a place to go to vent my anger--which I did in front of parents, family, and friends--until I had no friends left! (smiley). At least no SDA friends. I will readily admit that the word "Satanic Cult" conjures up a lot of horrible images in my mind. My grandfather was an SDA missionary for 27 years to the Amazon River, and his book "Lightbearer to the Amazon" by Leo B. Halliwell is a wonderful testimony to the power of God to change lives. He was not heavy into EGW, and didn't even preach her to the Amazaon natives. There are so many times in that book, where it is clear that he dwelt with Satanic cultic power that was demonstrated on so many occasions, and the fruit of changed lives as they came to know Christ was such a powerful testimonial. It is this side of Adventism, from my Mom's side of the family that I can testify was truly Christian and not cultic. Maybe that was an isolated case, and maybe there are no other missionaries from the SDA church doing any good. It is certainly possible that the SDA church no longer has any blessings from God, but I would not want to limit God's power in anyway. This is where the terminology used by some really affects me at a deeply personal level. I think Romans 14 would also be an excellent text to remember. Because, who am I to judge the motives of another pastor who may indeed be called to preach the gospel even in a church like SDA with a false foundation. Anyway, just some of my personal ramblings, and I apologize if I have hurt anyone who may be reading what I have posted. Stan | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1268 Registered: 10-2004 |
I just want to clear a few things up so that there is no misunderstanding. It seems that some of my words have been twisted or misrepresented on this thread. I have never in my life referred to the SDA church as a "Satan worshipping cult." When I have used the term "Satanic cult" I have made it clear what I mean and have given solid Bible back-up. And it is also not true that I question the Christianity of anyone who believes the Gospel and stays in the SDA church. Also, I do not judge the motives of those who stay in the SDA church. Just wanted to clear up those few things.  God bless you all. Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on May 15, 2006) | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 1392 Registered: 7-2003 |
Can I ask a seemingly silly question? Is there a neutral side? Is it possible that the organization (which is what I have specifically dealt with in expressing my opinions) can be neither true to the gospel nor a tool of satan? Because if we at least agree that the religion as a whole, potentially excluding some individual pastors, speaks contrary to scripture and the gospel, which would not be "on God's side" just to use a phrase, and the idea it is "on Satan's side" is unpallatable, is it being suggested it is neutral? Because if the fact that a minority of pastors teach the real gospel redeems the whole of the organization to make it "on God's side" then it seems we would have to endorse it as a Christian church. And because of B's adamant refusal to attend my church specifically, it is hard for me to comprehend any SDA really wants to be equated with non-SDA churches. It certainly does seem to be their goal to eliminate all non-SDA churches, to put their "calling" bluntly. For a long time I really struggled when my friends would say B was unsaved, because I heard his words that sounded like he "knew" Christ. But when I look at what scripture says the fruit of the spirit is, I just don't see any of it. And though he uses a lot of religious words, I still don't know if he's saved. You all certainly know better than me about the realities of true salvation in the SDA religion, but my struggle in classifying the religion is I do not see it as teaching the gospel on the whole (not ignoring the various individuals you all are privvy to). Even B eventually acknowledged (after listening to me try to explain the gospel from scripture I don't know how many times) that the SDA religion doesn't teach the gospel as I understand it. And if it doesn't teach the gospel clearly, I don't know how to say it is "for" God. But others don't want to say it's "for Satan" (which is quite ironic given the SDAs I know have no problem saying my church is "for Satan" and they know nothing other than the day the doors are open). It is quite perplexing to me to even comprehend the options. It sounds as though some, based upon the individuals they know, want to protect the whole, and if you look at the story of Lot, and even one righteous person would have saved the city, then maybe God overlooks the errors of the whole for the benefit of the few. But then I have to wonder why it matters what you believe if you're square on the gospel? Seems you could teach all manner of heresy, but the gospel keeps you "safe"...for lack of a better word. For me, if I decide it's a Christian church, how can I advise my children and friends not to go there? I know there have been a lot of harsh words on this thread, but if you could step outside the box of your position for a minute, if it is not a cult, what is it? It not only divides itself from others in the body of Christ because they are not part of adventism and its "truth", but it seems to divide many within the body of Christ because of the lack of consistent classification. Personally, I do not understand how someone can passively approve of their IJ teaching by silence or even membership. I know what I have personally sacrificed to stay true to what I understand of the gospel and scripture as a whole, but maybe it doesn't really matter and I've stood up for my view of integrity and put my family at odds for what? Beliefs that are no big deal? I don't know how to view adventism as neutral, and I don't know how to view it as "for God". What are my options left? Does that make any sense at all? | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 531 Registered: 7-2004 |
Jeremy, you used 2 Cor 3 as your immediate support for SDAism being a "satanic cult." 2 Cor 3 does speak of a veil as you pointed out, but it does not attribute this veil to Satan. If those of us who "know" you and share many of your views think that your use of "satanic cult" gives the impression of "Satan worshipping cult" then imagine what those who don't share your views must think of your statement. If I misunderstood your comments to be judging the motives of some who have stayed in the SDA church, I apologize. Colleen, the reason for the individual specific examples is that several posters have suggested no SDA pastor can be presenting the true Gospel. Demonstrating that even one does would effectively defeat that argument. I find the statement problematic because what are we going to conclude about pastors like Greg. Was he preaching a false gospel the week before he left? How about a month before? Six months? A year? To accept that whole line of thinking leads to conclusions that even the diehard proponent of calling SDAism a cult would have a hard time supporting. Furthermore there is an important point within this discussion that keeps getting skimmed over. I don't think anyone denies that SDAism presents a mixture of truth and error about the Gospel. A very confusing mix, I believe, due to the amount of truth within it. Many cult watchers look to that same mix and see the amount of truth that is present as a basis for distinguishing between SDAs and JWs/LDS/etc. Many times formers speak of this mix and suggest that it makes it an even more dangerous cult that the more obvious ones. How should we approach that difference in viewing the same data and arriving at two divergent conclusions? And what value, if any, is there in attempting to understanding why outsiders so frequently come to a different conclusion? Personally it was stopping to look at the basis for those conclusions that has made me more hesitant to apply the label "cult" to SDAs. At the same time I have challenged some of those who don't call SDAism a cult to defend why they distinguish it from JW's and LDS. | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 532 Registered: 7-2004 |
Melissa, the majority of those who do not consider SDAism to be a cult still consider it to be a church with heterodox beliefs, including dangerous heresies. Just because someone has refrained from calling it a cult, does not mean that they consider the church anything resembling mainstream. | ||
| Cw Registered user Username: Cw Post Number: 59 Registered: 4-2006  |
As a 1st Generation Never-Waser in Cahoots with Formers as Melissa and I have dubbed ourselves, I may be prone to over-simplify this discussion but it's obviously a real "button" for some on this forum. I guess my attitude is "what's in a word?" Back to simplicity--I just know that when I found out my daughter was in love with an SDA member and she is approaching marriageable age (19) I got a sick feeling in my gut. I am convinced that the Holy Spirit put that feeling in my gut to get me on my knees and to urge me to find out why I feel this way. Nobody said anything to me to cause my worry. And I was as naive about SDA as 95% of the rest of the Christian community. So it had to be the Holy Spirit that "zapped" me. Why would he do that???!!! Because something is wrong and worth a father being concerned over the spiritual well-being of his child. I don't care if it's called a Cult or a Satanic Cult or a social club, I know God does not want D to go there. But I think Satan would like her to go there. He might not gain her soul by it but he is sure causing discord in this family and he likes that about as much. So is Satan involved in every form of false doctrine? I would say so if it's seriously flawed as SDA seems to be. Is that the definition of Satanic? Like I said, I don't care if it is or is not called that-I just want it to go away from my family. I don't think your heated discussions here will do any harm to anyone reading them. But there may be some active SDA members monitoring this forum that get a kick out of it. Truce or not I appreciate you all and I've gleaned a lot out of your exchanges on many of the threads I have looked at. I think I will avoid the use of the phrase "Satanic Cult" though if I ever get to personally confront D's boyfriend. I think my best arguments will be along the lines of the New Covenant and that EGW was a false prophet. Just thought you might want to hear the thoughts of another "Non-Former" on this issue. CW | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1661 Registered: 3-2005 |
Jeremy, I don't mean any personal attack against you in any way. I respect you greatly for your vast knowledge of Adventism, and most recently your deep understanding of the doctrines of the Reformed faith. There was a time in the last month, when you did use Satan-worshipper, and it was quoted on the forum that night--maybe you will remember. But once you acknowledge that a person or a pastor can believe the gospel and then stay in Adventism, then that is an acknowledgement of the fact that there is something different about Adventists than JW's. Because, if a person believes the gospel, and stays still in Jw--either as a member or as a preacher--which I say is impossible--then I would say that that person was not truly born again. This is why I believe Adventism--even though so similar in so many ways to the other cults--is different. All the other major cults are completely monolithic. They ENFORCE exact similarity of belief. As John MacArthur says, Adventism is all over the map. You have historical Adventism--embracing Arianism, and the supreme authority of EGW in some cases. You have liberal Adventism, which in my opinion is non-Christian. But there is still a significant segment of evangelical Adventism, which I can't possibly write off as non-Christian. This is the approach that the majority of cult experts seem to adopt. SDA is far too diverse to quantify. Most of us (including myself) come from the cultic historical-traditional form of Adventism. Melissa, B's church is from the cultic branch. On another thread you said that B's pastor did not accept Cottrell's paper on the sanctuary. That is evidence of the cultic branch of Adventism. Stan | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1270 Registered: 10-2004 |
Rick, actually I used 2 Cor. 3 to show that there is a veil. The passages I used to show that there are evil spiritual forces at work were 1 John 4, 1 Timothy 4, and Ephesians 6. Jeremy | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 211 Registered: 7-2005  |
Melissa, I believe you just give the most important reason of this debate. You said:
Before adressing your insights, I want to mention that the SDA make many persons to loose many things, by requiring them to keep the Sabbath. Many had lost better jobs because of the Sabbath, many were enstranged from their relatives, for the sake of the Sabbath. Now, if the sabbath keeping is not a must, I mean, it's not a command which nobody can disregard if they want to be saved, it will be extremely unchristian to call people to keep the sabbath renouncing better jobs, creating opposition with family and so on. If the sabath is just "if you want to keep a day, fine" it is unchristian to counsel people to keep the sabbath. Now, if someone can safely stay within adventism, be a member and keep his integrity intact, it will be unchristian to counsel him to exit. I remember a message directed to SDA pastors in the last issue of Proclamation in 2005 calling them to renounce their employment and adopt a position of integrity. Well, nobody has any right, and it be unchristian (like with the sabbath, to call them out of the system, because this means a tremendous task for them, it means unemployment, supporting the opposition of the family, friends, loosing too much, when in reality the option of staying within is valid. It's like you call them to sacrifice everything, they can loose money, their houses, their cars, almost all adventist friends, when other option is available. If there is a way of keeping the integrity by ramining in adventism, it's unchristian to counsel people to exit adventism, to become Former Adventists. Giving the fact that they will loose almost everything, if these move is not a must, but is just optional (like we change restaurants because in some places the food is badly preparated), we must certainly encourage people to stay where they are and work for a change within the system. It just not pay to loose so much if they can keep their integrity by staying. | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1271 Registered: 10-2004 |
Stan, as I said though, I have never referred to the SDA church as a "Satan worshipping cult." I did use that term for Ellen White, yes, and the reason for that was partly because of the way that she exalts Satan throughout her writings, which was partially documented by former SDA Pastor Jeffry Helsius in Proclamation! magazine. Jeremy | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 536 Registered: 7-2004 |
Jackob, It wouldn't be Godly to tell a person to stay in SDAism when they have been called by God to leave. But it also wouldn't be Godly to tell a person that they must leave if they are being called by God to stay and witness His Gospel. | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 709 Registered: 4-2000  |
Jackob, Thank you for your excellent assessment. If Adventism is so wonderful, partially or completely, why leave it? If Adventism is helping you to get to heaven, why leave it? If Adventism creates no obstacle to your salvation, why leave it? If Adventism causes no detour in your Christian journey, why leave it? If Adventist keeps you continually focused on Jesus, why leave it? If Adventism doesn't incredibly complicate your life, why leave it? If Adventism was founded solely upon Biblical truth, not deception, why leave it? If Adventism has a true prophetess, why leave it? If Adventism is the final link of the Protestant Reformation, why leave it? If Adventism is God's only true, remnant church, why leave it? If Adventism teaches complete assurance of your salvation, why leave it? Based on my personal experience and research, NONE of the above possiblitites are even remotely plausible. We need to encourage our Adventist friends to stop "Judaizing" Christianity and start "Christianizing" the world. Someone aptly stated that, "If we don't have much faith on the inside, we create religion on the outside. We are not earthly people having a heavenly experience. Rather, by God's grace, we are heavenly people having an earthly experience, a short one at that." Therefore, let us faithfully and urgently expose the captor and evangelize the captives! Dennis Fischer | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 213 Registered: 7-2005 |
Ric, The witness for the gospel encompasses more than words, or a message spoken. In the real life the words are only a part of the communication. The voice, the attitude, the body language, all speak, sometimes more clearly than the words. For example, someone can lie with his tongue, but his body language betrays them. When we witness for the gospel, we need more than a clear message. We need to give witness with our entire beinge. Our entire life needs to be conformed with the gospel message. This means that if we no longer believe in the Investigative Judgment, our entire life must be in harmony with our beliefs. Remaining in a position of being employed by a church founded on a lie which we no longer believe, means that an important part of our life is not in harmony with what we believe. Our position will lack integrity. This is the situation even when we speak openly about our disagreement. I saw myself how on forums many will dismiss entirely the witness of adventists who no longer believe in IJ. They simply said "if this church is founded on a lie, why do you are still an SDA?" and go on. The adventists rightfully think that our deeds give a powerfull testimony about what we really believe. Our faith or lack of faith is seen in our willingness to surrender all to Jesus, being willing to lost everything for His sake. As I said, even if we disagree openly with the IJ, we will still be in a position which lacks integrity. Our words are in opposition with our deeds. After all, we are still members, no longer believing in the foundational pillar of our church. What part of our live we want people to believe that is our true position? Our words which affirm the gospel, or our membership which denies the gospel? We are in words pro gospel, but our position as members denies the gospel. But the pastors have not even the chance to speak openly about their true beliefs, about the fact that IJ is a hoax, or the sabbath. The SDA church will never permit this, because it's reason for it's existence This is why I believe that if God calls someone to give witness for the gospel, He also calls him to a position of integrity toward this message. And being being a member of the SDA church, or a pastor, is not a position of integrity toward the gospel message. | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 539 Registered: 7-2004 |
Thanks for your opinion Jackob. But it isn't one that can be easily reconciled with the reality of what many pastors and others actually did during the time that they were transitioning out. According to your idea none of these people could possibly be used by God during this time as they were liars living outside of God's calling. We don't know God's callings for others, we don't know who may be "transitioning" as we write, we don't know who is still growing in their understanding of the Gospel to the point that it becomes clear that there is no reconciling all of the teachings of SDAism to the Gospel. And because we don't know these things when we make blanket judgments about groups of people we run the very real risk of judging servants of God. "Who are (we) to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand." But it is also clear to me that there is no desire or support to be promote credible criticism of SDA doctrine as being more appropriate and effective than inflammatory rhetoric and blanket judgment of people. I don't feel particularly welcome to speak freely here anymore, nor do I appear to be among those who share my views such that I can both seek and give support. I think it is time for me to step away from this forum, at least for a while. | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 215 Registered: 7-2005 |
Ric, I don't throw stones at nobody, because this means that the biggest stone will crush my head. Why? I'm still an sda on the church record. I gave my resignation letter, but my pastor is still trying to convince me to remain. I know from some sources that he no longer believe in IJ, and the sanctuary message. He is against perfectionism, and the possibility of sinless living, and the final generation theology of Andreasen. My church is liberal in many aspects. The elders call almost in every month a pastor who believes like those theologians from Loma Linda, like Provonsha, or Graham Maxwell, in the moral influence theory of atonement, and also in some sort of gospel of success in life. Many people here are just cultural adventists. In this way I can easily find for myself a confortable place. I have some good friends, I'm a bass singer who can play low tones which makes some good effects (not many churches have good choirs, and few have bass singers who can play low tones). I have many good motives to remain adventist and speak about grace, and keep the good name I have. I don't give this information for praise myself, but only to point the many things which are very precious for me andI will loose all. I love adventism, I love the adventist people, and have the capacity to shut my ears to bad information, if it is necessary. But I must insist for my name to be deleted from church books, because I cannot remain in a position which lacks integrity. Ric, I'm sorry if you will leave the forum because of me, believing that I make blank judgments. I don't, because I can't. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3991 Registered: 12-2003 |
Jackob, I understand your decision; it is exactly parallel to the one Richard and I finally madeówith the same senses of loss. Rick, I also understand your concerns. Even though I see the underlying issue differently, I still respect you. Thank you, Jackob, for sharing your current experience with us. I know how painful this transition and these losses are, and I also know how compelling is your need to sever your ties. Colleen |
