Post Number: 2236
|Posted on Sunday, November 15, 2015 - 4:16 pm: || |
I can't count how many times I have been accused of this by SDAs for criticizing the beliefs and teachings of the SDA church.
- Is it bitterness and hatred that causes a new convert to SDAism to "share the Sabbath truth" with their family and friends?
- Is it bitterness and hatred that causes SDAs to actively try to draw people out of their churches and into SDAism?
- Is it bitterness and hatred when SDAs call the Pope the anti-Christ? Or call others apostate Protestants and daughters of the harlot?
- Is it bitterness and hatred when SDAs say that people in other churches are worshipping the sun god, rather than the Creator?
Post Number: 80
|Posted on Sunday, November 15, 2015 - 11:09 pm: || |
you are right on. Terrible double-standard. Hang in there!
Post Number: 404
|Posted on Monday, November 16, 2015 - 6:51 pm: || |
The other thing that bugs me, is when someone criticizes the doctrines of the SDA church, it's an "attack". Give me a break! The SDA church labels all Christians as deceived, or any number of awful things. But, that's okay. SDA's can say anything (even if it isn't true), but don't dare criticize them!
Post Number: 2240
|Posted on Tuesday, November 17, 2015 - 10:01 am: || |
It isn't even the notion of a "double standard" that really bugs me. It is the assumption that the other person is making about me-that I am dishonest, lack integrity, will say or do anything to hurt their beloved church just because I somehow was hurt or mistreated by the SDA church.
I assume that the SDAs I am conversing with make the statements that they do about other churches and doctrines out of their own conviction that SDAism is true, or at least mostly true.
But it is exceedingly rare that an SDA will make the same assumption about my motives or convictions.
Post Number: 15289
|Posted on Monday, November 23, 2015 - 11:34 am: || |
Rick, you are so right. I share those reactions. I'll bet you've gotten push-back from your recent blog...
Thank you for your integrity!
Post Number: 1090
|Posted on Friday, November 27, 2015 - 3:52 pm: || |
I agree too! It takes away from the discussion at hand.
It really is hard to discuss beliefs when the other person turns around and attacks your integrity or your emotions. I would rather have a person say they don't agree with my position rather than to attack me personally.
I remember discussing the scapegoat issue years ago with my husband's family. Their response: how long have you been adventist? They couldn't defend their position... yet didn't agree with mine and all they had left was to ask "well... how long have you been adventist?" How long I was an adventist and whether I was bitter or not had NOTHING to do with the issue at hand.
It's a method of distraction...
Post Number: 202
|Posted on Saturday, November 28, 2015 - 5:44 am: || |
I agree whole-heartedly Rick!
It's "The Cult of Ellen" actively at work.
Post Number: 913
|Posted on Thursday, December 24, 2015 - 5:35 am: || |
Mainexile, that article made me think of the Mormons and how they live to have visitor centers and portraits of Joseph Smith up. EWs descendant along with others revere a woman who was so unbublical and a false prophet. Additionally this library is named after a man who railed against the Trinity AND the school is also named after an anti trinitarian. ( These three are their own unholy trinity now I hat I think of it)
Thankfully not all of her offspring. I was in touch with one for a while who admitted she is in error. Would to God the millions of SDAs would get the picture and surrender to Christ
Post Number: 421
|Posted on Thursday, April 14, 2016 - 4:37 am: || |
Cults have a persecution complex. They always think everyone is out to get them. Anyone who says anything against their beliefs is hostile towards them, or so they think.
Post Number: 410
|Posted on Thursday, April 14, 2016 - 9:17 am: || |
You are so right Butterfly.
When people criticize or disagree with SDA doctrine, it is always referred to as an "attack". But, it's perfectly okay for them to declare all other Christians as wrong, or deceived.
Post Number: 698
|Posted on Saturday, April 16, 2016 - 7:40 pm: || |
Any position (religious, political, racial, economics, climate change...it's an endless list) that is not based on logic, reason, common sense and objective truth/facts obviously cannot be legitimately defended.
SOP is to attack the messenger as a way of avoiding having to deal with the message that questions the position's validity.
Post Number: 15365
|Posted on Tuesday, April 19, 2016 - 11:03 pm: || |
Great point, Jonvil.