| Author | Message | ||
| Lucias (Lucias) |
I haven't posted here in a while but felt like I wanted to tonite. Feel like I've moved on in a large part from my need to focus on being a "former" and am now simply who I am. I didn't find a topic I could stick this under so I started a new one. We still get the Review and occasionally I read it. The October 2002 Adventist Review has an article in it from Jan Paulsen, the GC President, titled "The Theological Landscape". I just read this article tonite and two things jumped out at me. Overall I'd say Paulsen did a very excellent job laying out the issues that the SDA church is facing and the article was a good one. Its goal naturally would be to sway the opinion of laity and staff alike. The first was in his first area of focus "The Second Coming -- Do we still believe ?" which dealt with the fading focus, real or perceived, of end times messages like the sanctuary etc. from SDA preaching. Buried in there was the following quote : "The preaching and teaching of the eschaton is neither paranoi nor gloom -- nor is it pessimistic. We believe that the world as we know it is not repairable and is not survivable. This is not the general Christian view of the world. But it is the Adventist view of it." My observation is that nothing could be farther from the truth. The idea of the earth having become hopless and only being made better by the second coming and the creation of the new earth has been pretty much all pervasive. This is the sort of thing that, if you had no contact with the outside Christian community, would make you feel all warm and fuzzy about how much smarter/better you were than those "poor deluded Christians". The second thing that lept out at me was in his fourth point titled "The idea of Remnant" where he deals with the tension surrouding declaring that SDA's are the remnant. The following quote struck me : "We shun the perception of being arrogant, and we don't want to come across as being overly exclusive, but at the same time we believe that being Seventy-day Adventists has direct bearing on our salvation; that while a believer can be saved as a Catholic I would risk my whole spiritual life and salvation were I to leave what I am now and join any other community. Also we hold that the Adventist community is an instrument for salvation in God's hands such as no other. We hold these things, but we stop short of saying that you have to be a Seventh-day Adventist in order to be saved." As is typical, "White-man speak with forked tounge". Its an attempt to have it both ways. Nothing new but still intriguing. Primarily because most SDA apologists you run into, either in the internet or elsewhere, will make a big deal about how SDA's don't believe you have to be an adventist to be saved. They do this because they know to claim otherwise would immediately bring their collective dismissal by the rest of Christianity. What Paulsen did here was to put all together in one easy to read paragraph or two the entire issue. First membership in the SDA church "has direct bearing on our salvation". He's not out on a limb here as it is what is believed. Second the Advenist community has an inside track on getting people to be saved -vs- other Christian, even protestant ones. Ultimately as anyone can understand that advantage comes out of certain works that they do correctly, mere belief in the Sabbath is of no use unless it is acted upon afterall. Third, and most revealing, is when Paulsen states what all of us know about doctrine if not spelled out clearly elsewhere. Once a member you cannot leave or you will go to hell. That is what is drilled into you from cradle to grave in the organization. Anyway I found this interesting and thought I'd share it with the rest of you. | ||
| Jerry (Jerry) |
Yes, Lucias. This was a speech given at a leadership conference in late March or early April of this year in Greece or Turkey. We have discussed this article previously, but I think it is good you brought it up again. This, to me, was an interesting "artifact." With all the double-speak and "look at us we're just like you" posturing, one still gets a clear view of the recalcitrant historicism at the top. I was particularly amused by the ìmore theologia crucis and less theologia gloriaî segment of the speech. I could not detect much about the crucifixion, resurrection, or ascension in the speech. In addition, did you notice the background theme of centralized control? That has always been the case. This was just a reassertion of the principle. There is a lot of interesting information about how the top of the organization is thinking these days. They carefully guard and obscure the information, but it is there. | ||
| Lori (Lori) |
In regard to the A.R. article: Frankly, I don't understand the logic of Adventist in evangelizing a person with "further truth" who is already acknowledged to be "saved in blissful ignorance" with the foreknown conclusion that if you tell them "additional truths" and they reject it then they will be forever lost. This is the reason I never told people what I knew as an Adventist---if they were saved in their state of ignorance then who the hell was I to tell them something, which if they reject it, nullifies their former status? It is now that I finally fully understood the evil of the "lesser light". The Gospel message came obliterating any idea that salvation came from observance of the law. The Gospel message, the power of God for salvation was fully revealed!!! (Unadulterated Truth--believe the Gospel message and you will be saved!) Hence, God had been successful!! He had provided salvation. So, deception must create a way to obliterated the power of salvation in the same way that God obliterated the idea man could save themselves through observing laws. Deception could not blatantly ignore the Gospel but he could add another "step to salvation" which if ignored obliterated the work of the cross!!!! Ingenious!! So deception re-introduced certain laws, certain shadows, claiming them to be the final test of prove that you REALLY BELIEVE!!! It's evil!!! At times like these, when I ponder the complexities of the deception,I wonder how I ever escaped from it! It was the power of God that released me from deceptions bondage. I did nothing to deserve it. I simply listened and made the decision to trust God. I did the humanly unacceptable and I believed there was no sin that Christ didn't die for. I believed Christ needed no help from me to redeem me. In doing so, I took up the cross of shame, the work of the cross, which some are too embarrassed to admit was "good enough". It is shame of the cross which causes some to refuse to accept it as the completion of salvation. The simplicity of the cross is not fancy enough to do ALL the work. The cross must be decorated with human achievements in order to be sufficient is what they say. The 4th commandment must be adhered to the heart of the cross, the feet must not stray from its commands, the hands must work diligently to protect the body from the evils of certain foods, entertainment, adornments and the like which attempt to strip salvation from the spirit within it, the mouth must continually prophecy the truths unpublished in the Word of God for only these additional truths can gird the soul and ensure salvation. But this salvation is ever fragile--it can be broken, stolen and unnoticeably lost. Intense fear shackles all these items to the simple cross of Christ--nearly obliterating the its true essence from view. It is those who keep their eyes on this decorated cross of shadows who never fully realize the beauty of salvation. For one must look up from the shadows to see the substance. My dog continues to be a source of analogies in shadows and substances. He sees the substance of something (butterfly, bee, frisbee)but he immediatley becomes distracted by it's shadow because he keeps looking at the ground. He intensely follows the shadow, at a full run, darting back and forth. When the substance gets too close to him he loses the shadow and becomes confused, turning in circles, frantically searching. All the while the substance is laying right in front of him (or has hit him in the head!) but he can't put the two together as the same thing!! The substance of the shadows came down from heaven. And people were so distracted by the shadows they couldn't identify the substance. The shadows had dissappeared and the substance was RIGHT THERE but instead of seeing the two as one people continued to frantically search for the shadow completely ignoring the substance. The substance has now ascended into heaven and we must look up from the shadows we have decorated with our human efforts in order to see it. | ||
| Lydell (Lydell) |
>This is the reason I never told people what I >knew as an Adventist---if they were saved in >their state of ignorance then who the hell was I >to tell them something, which if they reject it, >nullifies their former status? Lori,well, if you put it THAT way....it's kinda easy to see! haha Amazing how much clearer things are when you stand in the light, isn't it? | ||
| Janet (Janet) |
Lori, I SO appreciate your views and analogies! It really helps me to understand! Thanks! God Bless, Janet | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
Lori, great post! This weekend I had conversations with a young woman who has Adventist roots but is a former. In truth, however, she still has strong emotional ties to Adventism. She believes in the gospel, but she regrets the loss of potlucks, the "family feeling," the attention given to teetotalling and clean living, etc. Even though she is a "former", she exemplifies to me the reality that many young SDAs do not really understand their connection to the church. They don't "believe" in EGW, they don't believe the Sabbath is for salvation, they don't believe th IJ, etc., but they are deadly loyal to the church and to their identity. Paulsen's letter, is, I am certain, God-ordained. It declares openly that nothing has truly changed, even though the PR machine has done a good job of "whitewashing" the externals so the church appears evangelical. One Christian woman I know has said to me several times that the changes she sees give her hope that the church will change and leave EGW behind. In reality, it can never be that simple. The real problem with Adventism is not simply statements of belief. The real problem is spiritual. If interpretations and doctrines were the only problems, the church could change with enough encouragement and education. But the Adventist church was founded on a lie, and it was grounded on a false prophet. Paul actually identified the Adventist problem in Galatians 3:1, "You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you?" There is a spirit of deception in Adventism, and I don't mean that metaphorically. There is a real spiritual power that claims Adventism and claims Adventists, and they do not know it. Just as Mormonism has spiritual claims upon it, so does Adventism. If it didn't, it would be no big deal for an Adventist to move to a different Christian church if he or she found that church's doctrines more biblical. Adventism has convinced its members, by means of cleverly devised fables and deceptions, that they will be lost if they leave. When Adventists begins praying for truth and reading the Bible to discover truth, they are plagued by soul-shaking doubts upon realizing they must hold onto Jesus at the expense of their Adventist identities. Those doubts do not come from Jesus. In fact, they come to rob us of our new-found confidence and security in Jesus. Satan alone can torture us with fear and accusations of that depth and hopelessness. I am convinced that ultimately a person leaving Adventism really must renounce it and ask Jesus to replace it with the Holy Spirit. Adventism carries with it a spirit of deception and arrogance, and it is something all formers have to release to God before they can truly be free. I continue to pray that God will reveal the truth about Adventism and call to himself all those who want truth. Colleen | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
By the way, Lucias, it's great to hear from you again! I've wondered how you are doing. Colleen | ||
| Lori (Lori) |
In regard to the text in Matthew 24:24, "if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect" does not the "if it were possible" actually denote it is not possible? John 10:28 says, "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any one pluck them out of my hand." Another aspect of Matthew 24:24 is: it is set during the tribulation. At this point the 144,000 witness are already in their place of safety completely unreachable by Satan and his forces of evil. The remaining believers on this earth are forced into hiding waiting for the appearing of Christ. At this time the enemy will be trying to lure out believers from their place of hiding in order to kill them. What better way to lure them out then to pretend Christ has come!!! This passage has nothing to do with a believer who simply changes which denomination they wish to worship with. | ||
| Lori (Lori) |
I appeal to you--all believers--in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you (differing denominations) agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. Some of my fellow believers, from Chloe's household, have informed me that there are quarrels among you. (Can you imagine the quarrels that would erupt between different denominations if the publications which were intended only for "internal" use were distributed widely through the population of believers in Christ?) What I am saying is this: One of you says, "I follow Paul"; another, "I follow Apollos"; another "I follow Cephas"; still another, "I follow Christ." Let's modernize this a bit: One of you says, "I follow Presbyterians"; another, "I follow Adventist"; another "I follow Catholics; still another "I follow Christianity." Is Christ Divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into the name of Paul? (Imagine for a moment the tone these next two sentences must have been written in!!) I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized into my name.......For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel---not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. Was the Adventist church crucified for you? Were you baptized into the name of Ellen White? Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel--not with the words of human wisdom, est the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. What after all is Apollos? (What are the Adventist?) And what is Paul? (What are the Catholics?) Only servants, through whom you came to believe--as the Lord has assigned to each his task. The Catholics planted the seed, the Adventist watered it, BUT GOD MADE IT GROW. So neither the Adventist or the Catholics are anything, BUT ONLY GOD, who makes things grow. The man who plants (the Baptist) and the man who waters (the Pentecostal) have one purpose, and each will be rewarded accoring to his own labor. For we (all denominations) are God's fellow worker; you (the believers)are God's field, God's building. The foundation for all believers is Jesus Christ. Certain teacher and leaders come to that foundation building with different qualities of materials upon it. Some of the teachings are of the highest standard and will survive the most intense flames. Others are flimsy and fragile even though they may appear beautiful and showy they will be consumed in the midst of a flame. So, then, no more boasting about the denominations of men...you are of Christ and Christ is of God.......therefore, judge nothing before the appointed time; WAIT TILL THE LORD COMES. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness (He will reveal the low quality of workmanship hidden amongst the beautiful exterior that is built of HIS foundation.) and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his PRAISE from God. Wait a minute! That said each would receive their PRAISE! Like it or not all believers have a task that God has assigned them to do--all denominations have a task from God. All the denominations that confess with their mouth Jesus is Lord and believe that God raised him from the dead will be saved. Where they err from this point is not our concern.....we are not to assume that one is of God and the other is not--that one group is saved and the other is lost. We are only to assume that each person will be rewarded for the quality of work they laid upon the foundations of Christ. And we are not the judge of this--we are to wait till the Lord comes! Did you notice the person that said "I follow Christ." was included in this reprimand? 1 Cor 1, 3 and 4 | ||
| Loneviking (Loneviking) |
I have to emphatically disagree, Lori. The text that you began with is a good one---but the emphasis is different. The problem with following a certain Bible teacher (note that the teachers aren't condemned, the focus is those who want to elevate the teachers) is that the focus is off the scriptures. There are certain scriptural absolutes which, when denied, means that a 'church' simply isn't Christian. Remember Paul's letter to the Galatians? He called a system of legalism a 'different gospel', and warned his readers that if anyone--even an angel, should preach a different gospel than he had given them they should be 'anathema'. That word means 'cut off'! John, writing in his short letters, warns the believers in his church against providing food and lodging for 'false teachers'. He clearly says that if you take these people into your home you are also participating in their sin. In Revelation, Jesus said that He 'hates' the doctrine of the Nicolatians. That doctrine is one that the Catholics embrace, which says that not all are equal. The priests, cardinals and bishops are trained to interpret the scriptures correctly and the members should believe as they believe. Christ says that he hates this doctrine. Another test would be to ask if a church denies that Christ came as man and as God. Many of the Apostolic churches and the United Pentecostals deny this, as do the J.W.'s. These are NOT Christian churches despite what their name says. I think what confuses people is that many of the members of these apostate sects are good moral people. They look and act like we would expect Christians to do. Also, I do believe the Holy Spirit is working within these organizations to bring people out of them---and where He works, you do find manifestations (occasionally) of His power. That does NOT mean that these are Christians organizations. All believers need to be very careful that when they look for a church home that they examine the teachings of that church very carefully. Don't just go and join because your best friend goes there; or because they have a great youth group; or a dynamic preacher. See instead how they match up to the Word! | ||
| Lori (Lori) |
Your point is a good one. And I can see how what I wrote was misunderstood. This passage is written only to believers. The fact that someone is an unbeliever disqualifies them from this "reprimand" by Paul. In regard to Pentecostals; that was possibly a poor example, however the Pentecostal I knew was a believer in Jesus Christ as the God-man who came to earth, maybe she was an exception. I understand where you are coming from in your view of this passage. However, I can't see how your position can be accurate for one small reason. If this passage is only dealing with those who elevated the status of "the one they followed", then why is the one who stated "I follow Christ" included in the reprimand? There could not possibly be anyway that Christ could be esteemed too highly!! To me, the subject is about divisions within the body of Christ---they must be believers to be part of the church, the body of Christ--these divisions were caused by judgmental attitudes of superiority and the reprimand being: how do you perceive that you are better than another believer when nothing you have came from your own doing but was a gift from God same as theirs. Appreciate your input | ||
| Jerry (Jerry) |
Lori, I wish to ask some questions to clarify your point from 1 Cor. It was a long post, but I believe I see a statement of summation: ìWhere they err from this point is not our concern.....we are not to assume that one is of God and the other is not--that one group is saved and the other is lost.î To whom is this admonition primarily directed? To what type of statement, policy or doctrine does it apply? Please give concrete examples. What is the limit of this admonition? That is, are any statements of dispute between people who call themselves Christian, NOT admonished by this passage or others? | ||
| Dennis (Dennis) |
Colleen, Excellent advice in your post. No surprise! Adventists do not trust the Holy Spirit in doctrinal matters. They want everything solidly written down to constantly flash before our eyes (legalism). Their distrust of the Holy Spirit shows up especially well in their Sabbath and tithing doctrines. They frown upon a complete, Spirit-led life because the Sabbath, tithing, et cetera is not mandated under the new covenant. Additionally, the SDA hierarchy does not entrust its individual members to be solely indwelt by God's Spirit. Consequently and sadly, they do not even trust the Bible as being an all-sufficient and inerrant revelation from God. It took me many years to prayerfully and biblically reach the conclusion that Adventism is indeed a cult, that was born in deception, under the tutelage of its false prophet. It is an authentic, yes amazing, miracle that any of us ever escaped its entangled strongholds. Soli Deo Gloria (all to the glory of God), Dennis J. Fischer | ||
| Dennis (Dennis) |
NEWSFLASH! I am delighted to report that Robert K. Sanders, editor and webmaster of the excellent Website, TRUTH OR FABLES(www.truthorfables.com), has accepted Jesus as his True Sabbath Rest after 47 years of Sabbatarianism. You can read his powerful testimony about accepting the True Sabbath on his Website. Dennis J. Fischer | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
Wow! Thanks for the news, Dennis! I'll go check out his testimony. I agree, Lori, that the warnings in 1 Corinthians are directed toward believers, and I believe that the passage does address some of the prpoblems of denominationalism. I would clarify, however, the definition of "believer". Paul's epistle to the Galatians was not about their not being believers. It addressed the problem of adulterating the gospel. Jesus himself said many would say, "Lord, Lord!" and remind the returning Christ of the work they had done in His name, but he would not accept them. John really clarified the definition of a true Christ-follower when he quoted Jesus: "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit....You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.'...Whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God." (John 3:5,7,21) People can actually do lipservice to Jesus but not KNOW him. They can claim his blood's power to save but have only mental acknowledgment of the gospel. It's only when a person allows the Holy Spirit, which is our promised seal and guarantee of things to come (Ephesians 1:13) to give us a new heart that our belief in Jesus effects the new birth. Remember the parable of the seeds that fell on rocky ground? They sprang up, flourished quickly, but died because they had no roots and could not withstand the heat. People can be convicted of the truth but not want the surrender belief requires. They can "play the game" and participate in church; they can say the right words, but there's no power in those words. In short, they may even do things that seem to be awesome acts of God, but they do not bear the fruit of the Spirit. (see Galatians 5:22-23) I do believe the 1 Corinthians passage about divisions has something important to say to denominations. But I believe that the bottom line is: Who has your heart? Do YOU hold the rights to your own heart, or does Jesus have your heart? People can make an idol of the most holy things--they can claim the authority of JEsus and his cleansing blood but still hold their hearts back from the Spirit's control. Their lives lack the integrity and openness and peace and joy and patience and love and kindness and self-control that are hallmarks of the Spirit's indwelling. As Packer says in his book "Living in Step with the Spirit", a person can have the power without the grace. God can even use the powerful works of an unregenerate person to affect others for the kingdom. But the right forumula and the right words and even the power does not equal a regenerate heart. (Think Judas and Balaam, for examples.) Belief in Jesus is more than an intellectual exercise; it's surrendering our rights to our identities and to ourselves completely and allowing Jesus to have his way in us. HE is our great reward! Praise Father, Son, and Holy Spirit! Colleen | ||
| Jerry (Jerry) |
Hmm. Colleen, I happen to agree with what you said. However, I am a little confused with Lori's post. Lori, You refer to Matthew 24:24 as if it was previously mentioned in the thread. Unless I missed it, I don't see a prior reference. This makes it difficult to understand why you thought it applicable in this thread. At first sight, it seems to be a reprimand to those of us who have been explicitly critical of some of the doctrines of Seventh-day Adventists as unscriptural or "un-Gospel." Perhaps that is not what you meant. Perhaps it is what you meant. Maybe I did not read it correctly or thoroughly enough. Can you clarify? I am genuinely interested in your perspective. I am unclear about your contextual intent in this thread. Jerry | ||
| Lori (Lori) |
I apologize for the lack of "connection". I refered to Matthew 24:24 because it is the big hang-up text Adventist use to snag those who question the denominations beliefs and think about leaving. And since the major phrase from Paulsen's speech that has been sited on this forum is concerning the lose of ones salvation if they should leave the Adventist doctrines once they have known them. Why did I post it? More so for the benefit of a questioning Adventist than for the reprimand of a former Adventist or one who is critical of Adventism. Frankly, most of those people who are on this site as formers have I'm sure been through a similiar situation as my own. 1. Initial disbelief/denial that your church could be so unBiblical. 2. Acceptance of Reality--occupied or following by some degree anger and bitterness about the deception 3. Period of Intense Reaction--trying to take other people out with you. Attempt to expose the false teachings 4. Experience of Rejection from the people you loved the most 5. And, Finally Freedom!! When I voiced my opinions openly to my friends and family--I was rejected! Period. I was told to my face---"Well, now, you are just like the rest of the world." I maintained that "I was following Christ"---and I felt like I, for a period of time, experienced what I'll called reversed arrogance. As an Adventist I had been superior to the other Christians because I had more truth. As a former Adventist--A Full fledged Christian---I was now superior because I was only trusting in Christ--I was living and growing in Grace!! However, I had in reality only replaced one form of arrogance with another. Does that explain it??? We all have the inert tendency to judge people bsed upon our own standards. But God says over and over and over again--DO NOT JUDGE EACH OTHER. In God's eyes I'm not better/no more worthy of keeping salvation than a person who believed (truly believed in Christ) and then was confronted with a well-meaning perpson touting the "rules of Christianity"--don't wear that, don't eat that, don't say that, don't go there. In God's eyes I'm no better than the believer who fornicates after they are saved. In God's eyes I'm not better than the murdered who believed in Christ before in a fit of rage he killed his wife and his family. In God's eyes I'm no better than the person who believed in Christ and then encountered David Koresh and was deceived by this teachings. Why is it we assume if we are deceived by a false teaching that that sin of deception is covered by the work of the cross?? That's all deception is: It's a sin. It's not knowing enough to know what you are doing is wrong. And, those sins of deception, even if they are committed after we believed, they were judged on the cross, and if that individual believed in Christ, if the conscious thought entered the brain and it said, "I Believe what you say is true", then that person is covered with Perfect Righteousness. What is it that has convinced us that deception equals a loss of salvation? I'm in God's army and even if I fall victim to the enemy, even if I am ensnared by a trap, or become encircled by the enemy and am cut-off from my commander, I'm still God's; I don't belong to the enemy. Maybe I was new recruit--still wet behind the ears; and I've never been to war before and maybe like the Vietnam soldiers, I was set down in a field in the middle of a raging battle. Not knowing where to go, where to run, where to find shelter, I walked directly into a trap and was killed before I could figure out what to do. I didn't have enough information or the information given to me was wrong and I died because of it. Guess that means those other soldiers who got better information or who just lucky were more important to the Army than I was. Is this true of Christians? If you hear the Gospel and you believe it and immediately after doing so you are in a raging battle of deceptions and you don't have much information and you are immediately cut-off from your informants, you are surrounded by the enemy and you don't know what to do to, your just a babe in Christ. They are assaulting you with advanced equipment and you have nothing that but the basics in which to counter attack. (That's what Satan does he uses advanced courses against babes in Christ) You are taken captive by the deceivers and not knowing anything else you believe something they tell you and it's wrong. Does this nullify your belief? Isn't this what happens to Adventist and other religions as well, they hear the gospel, they believe and immediately they are bombarded with advanced courses. They are given no time to prepare--they are hit with end-time events, investigative judgment and they are shown our to prove it. They are so overwhelmed with the proof they can't think clearly. So they give up and they just say o.k.. Maybe I'm all off base, but I think God's grace is bigger than any sin of deception I or any believer could ever encounter and I think these sins were judged on the cross along with everything else. And, I know, during the moments that I can prevent myself from passing judgement on what other people think makes up the spiritual life and just look at them as God's child. And think good things about them--visualize them like God must see them. See their strong points and how valuable these must be to God's service. When I can do this it really changes the way I can treat them. It's hard to be nice to someone to their face when you've just been thinking how completely stupid and pathetic they are just moments before. Not passing judgment opens the door of freedom for to love them. | ||
| Jerry (Jerry) |
Thank you, so much Lori, That explains your previous posts perfectly. Praise God for the power of Jesusí blood! Jerry | ||
| Bmorgan (Bmorgan) |
Hey, I was just remembering years ago that we would celebrate or have a "Great Disappointment" memorial. Remember October 22, 1844. Yes, the Adventist of my time used it to solidify the truthfulness and specialness of the Remnant Church. Christ "failed to return to Earth" as the scripture said He would. according to Miller and his asventist followers. I remember the stories of the miracles God wroth to show the remnant that they were right aobut His movement from the Holy Place to the Most Holy Place. Does anynone remember the stories being told...God hiding the real meaning of his word from His people? The Gospel is powerful. Praise God for His finished work. | ||
| Richardjr (Richardjr) |
BMorgan, Yes I remember the stories. Happy 158th. | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
Eight years ago the LLU church celebrated the 150th anniversary of October 22 with a special church service. Isn't it ironic? They have made a day of remembrance for the event that established the "movement" in deception. I guess it's not surprising. It just amazes me, though, that they blatantly celebrate an event which they justified by calling God a manipulative "liar", an assertion which they say was justified because he wanted to get people ready to meet him. It's all so circular and crazy-making. Yes, BMorganóthe Gospel is powerful. Praise God for His finished work! Colleen | ||
| Dennis (Dennis) |
For quick access to the testimony of Robert K. Sanders, that I reported on October 21, simply go to: www.truthorfables.com/Renouncing_the_Sabbath.htm Truth or Fables is a large Website, so typing the above-address will be helpful to get direct access. I do not share his views on death, but I have communicated with him about the heresy of soul sleep and a temporary hell. His unbiblical view of death/conditionalism appears to be his last holdover from Adventism. By the way, a Christian classic on this topic is titled DEATH AND THE AFTERLIFE by Dr. Robert A. Morey. Dr. Morey repeatedly goes face to face with Leroy Froom in this book. This scholarly book should be required reading for every Seventh-day Adventist. Dennis J. Fischer | ||
| Thomas1 (Thomas1) |
The saddest irony of all is that they celebrate the "great deception / dissappointment" yet refuse to even acknowledge Easter, because it comes on the wrong day. The ONLY holiday that really should be celebrated with complete joy and thanksgiving! In His Grip <>< Thomas | ||
| Jerry (Jerry) |
What an appropriate comment, Thomas! The very article that is the main topic of this thread has stunning evidence about the disregard for the Easter events and disregard for the reasons why we, as Christians, should celebrate the holiday. Look at this small paragraph in the speech, where Elder Paulsen says, ìIn the second half of the 1950s there was a wind sweeping through our ranks that said we should become more "Christ-centered" in our preaching (more theologia crucis and less theologia gloria). And that has happened, and has to a considerable extent been undergirded by a better understanding of what Ellen White in her writings urged us to do. In and of itself this was good.î I was amazed at the theological disconnect illustrated by this section. Many of you may know that the concept of ìmore theologia crucis and less theologia gloriaî comes from the writings of Martin Luther. Although Martin Luther had some significant moral and behavioral shortcomings, he did have some important insights into the true nature of Christianity. He makes clear that this particular concept of ìtheologia crucisî is quite literally about the accomplishment of Jesus in the events of the crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension. For Elder Paulsen to say that the SDA church has focused on these events since 1950 is a little hard to understand. In light of the fact that there is NO MENTION of the cross, crucifixion, resurrection, or ascension in this major speech on theology betrays that assertion. Furthermore, to cite the writings of Ellen White as support for that concept is without merit. The emphasis placed on those events in her writings is scant, compared to the emphasis found in Lutherís writings. No wonder they do not celebrate Easter! | ||
| Lucias (Lucias) |
Jerry, That paragraph struck me as well. That the wind wanted to become more Christ centered means, by definition that Christ was not the center. Having been an Adventist since birth till a few years ago I understand exactly what is meant by this paragraph. The movement to "become more Christ centered" is seen by many as a weakening movement in the church. That is while Christ is indeed important we should avoid focusing "to much" on him because that will cause us to loose site of our distinctive message and cause us to blend with and become part of Babylon. Thus Paulsen is being very political when he tries to please all parties with the next sentence. "And that has happened, and has to a considerable extent been undergirded by a better understanding of what Ellen White in her writings urged us to do. In and of itself this was good." He tries to simultaneously praise both Ellen White and the movement that seeks to distance itself from the traditional SDA distinctives and align itself with the gospel and the larger Christian movement. Subtly he attempts to, by virute of establishing middle ground bring them back into a single identity. Interestingly he gives Ellen White the credit for the movement that happened in the latter half of the 1950's while at the same time pointing out that, although there were some risks, the move to become Christ centered has turned out to be a good thing. Therefore hinting that focusing to much on Christ without proper supervision may be a bad thing ? Truly it was a remarkably ironic piece of literature. | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
That's a great summary statement, Lucias! "Truly it was a remarkably ironic piece of literature." The document as a whole leaves me feeling a little crazy while simultaneously confirming that nothing is really changing. But I guess those two go together; it was the cognitive dissonance over the contradictory teachings and claims of the church that made me decide I had to know what the Bible REALLY said. Colleen |
