| Author | Message | ||
| Jorgfe Registered user Username: Jorgfe Post Number: 1522 Registered: 11-2005 |
An Adventist friend of mine asked, in essence, why Adventists and non-Adventists can't just dialog like other fellowships within the body of Christ do. I thought I would share my response here. I understand. Believe me, I do. My heart's desire, as an Adventist for 54 of the past 57 years, is that Adventists would view "non-Adventists" on the same plane before God, as the various fellowships within mainstream Christianity view each other as equal members in the body of Christ. In such a world there would be: Gilbert JOrgensen | ||
| Christo Registered user Username: Christo Post Number: 191 Registered: 2-2008 |
Thanks Gilbert, Chris | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 10749 Registered: 12-2003  |
You go, Gilbert! Thank you! Colleen | ||
| Doc Registered user Username: Doc Post Number: 488 Registered: 2-2003  |
Thanks Gilbert, You are right, of course. Just a little off track, we are having somewhat of a dispute about baptism here at the moment (by the way, five people from our mission got baptised on Saturday, so some things are going well!). As I have not been Adventist, I'm not sure what you meant about being baptised by a special holy man. Could you explain that concept, please? Thanks, Adrian | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 1838 Registered: 4-2000  |
Excellent points, Gilbert. Dennis Fischer | ||
| Gcfrankie Registered user Username: Gcfrankie Post Number: 660 Registered: 1-2007 |
Gilbert, What an excellent post. I don't think Adventists will ever get it. Doc, I am praising God for the five people who got baptized. Gail | ||
| Cloudy Registered user Username: Cloudy Post Number: 115 Registered: 7-2007  |
So true, Gilbert. I couldn't get the link you gave. Adrian, SDAs require baptism by a minister ordained by the SDA church. Nancy | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 7799 Registered: 3-2004  |
Gilbert, thanks. I do not have active SDAs in my life right now, but I see that all the time on CARM. Diana L | ||
| Doc Registered user Username: Doc Post Number: 489 Registered: 2-2003 |
Gail - me too. Nancy, Thanks - I thought it probably meant something like that. A bit like the priesthood - laity concept, err... Roman Catholic? Actually, I baptised these people myself, and although I am a church elder, I am not a so-called ordained minister. That was not the problem, however. My thought was that I wanted to baptise these guys into Christ as they had obviously repented and been born again, but the opposition was about the subject of church membership, which Hungarians are obsessed with, and I don't really care about. Anyway, I guess we will sort it out. AB | ||
| Seekr777 Registered user Username: Seekr777 Post Number: 816 Registered: 1-2003  |
Gilbert your link didn't work for me ? ? ? Richard | ||
| Jorgfe Registered user Username: Jorgfe Post Number: 1523 Registered: 11-2005 |
I'm sorry. Here is the full link - http://www.jesusinstituteforum.org/AssetOrLiability.html Adrian, when I refer to Adventism requiring a special "holy man", I refer to the unbiblical Adventist teaching that God does not honor baptisms by Christians unless they are pastors ordained by the Seventh-day Adventist Church. No where does the Bible teach this. The fact is that God only recognizes two classes of people -- those who are believers and those who are not. Anyone who is a believer is authorized to baptize another believer. Of course this would dilute the papal-like hierarchy that Adventism depends on. Likewise promoting the concept that Adventist baptismal class includes so much more than Scripture is also patently unscriptural. There is no connection between becoming a member of a local congregation of believers and baptism -- an outward expression of accepting Christ. We become a member of Christ's True Church the moment we accept Him as our personal Savior. Adventism attempts to position itself as Christ's True Church -- an umbiblical claim that I don't believe I have ever heard from any mainstream Christian pastor! Perhaps one of the most touching expressions is the perfectly biblical act of a Christian parent baptizing their child at the church of their choice. And yet Adventism will deny you the right to participate in this most holy occasion. They claim this as an exclusive role for their "ordained pastors" -- not ordained by God, but by the Seventh-day Adventist Church. How utterly disgusting! | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 850 Registered: 3-2009 |
Any ways, if ordination is the laying of hands in a sign of passing down the spirit or succession, then how are SDAs pastors ordained? Who ordained the first SDA pastor? If it was not a SDA then he was not passing the SDA spirit. He was ordained by what SDAs call Babylon. If it was a SDA, who ordained him? In either case there is no passing down of anything. So technically, SDA pastors are not ordained. Hec | ||
| Seekr777 Registered user Username: Seekr777 Post Number: 818 Registered: 1-2003 |
In my 50 years of experience in the SDA church I've never been in an SDA church that would not allow a person to become a member by "profession of faith", and accept the baptism by immersion from another church. Second I baptised my daughter while I was a member of the SDA church. I was/am not an ordained minister. There are many Christian churches where the baptism of people is by custom done by ordained ministers. Richard PS: thanks for the link, I'll go check it out now. again thanks. . | ||
| Jorgfe Registered user Username: Jorgfe Post Number: 1525 Registered: 11-2005 |
Richard, if a person has already been baptized by immersion somewhere else THEN they can be accepted into Adventist membership by profession of faith. In my 54 years as an Adventist, I have never ever seen a person who is not an ordained minister of the Seventh-day Adventist Church baptize someone into the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Only once have I ever seen an SDA pastor baptize (a doctor's daughter) without it being explicitly connected with SDA church membership, and that was an exception made by specific request. Practically every SDA pastor will clearly tell you that the only legitimate SDA baptism is one done by an ordained SDA minister. I recently asked this very question of SDA Pastor Kevin Morgan on CARM, and he was quite emphatic about legitimate baptisms being the exclusive domain of ordained SDA pastors. Of course there are always single exceptions to anything. Gilbert Jorgensen | ||
| Jrt Registered user Username: Jrt Post Number: 906 Registered: 10-2008 |
Smile. You can baptize if you are not an ordained minister of the SDA Church - but you have to have permission from the conference you are baptizing in. I know this first-hand. | ||
| Believer247 Registered user Username: Believer247 Post Number: 94 Registered: 3-2009 |
Only one time in my 34 years in Adventism, have I seen a person baptized by anyone other than SDA minister......a young man asked to be baptized by the head elder of the church, due the elder having been the one to "bring him into the truth", studied with him I suppose. The church board had to ask permission of the conference to have the elder baptize him, the conference did approve it. | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 853 Registered: 3-2009 |
It's standard procedure that local church elders can baptize, but they do need specific permission from the conference president. In the case of "local church elder" who are assistant pastors, or make it assistant pastors that by policy have to be "local church elders" they can baptize without asking for specific permission. But they only can baptize in the church where they are elders. That's how they go around to allow women to baptize since they cannot be ordained. Hec | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 10759 Registered: 12-2003 |
There are a few So Cal churches that will do baptisms that are not into church membership officially if requested...I believe the Celebration Center is one of them. This, however, is not standard Adventist policy. Those people, however, are still members of the local congregation, and they are held in the Adventist baggage--even if it's not all clear to them. The spirit of Adventism doesn't leave just because the local congregation is iconoclastic. I don't mean to sound spiteful—I know that I often hear that clarity on the spiritual reality of Adventism is "angry" or "bashing" or otherwise hostile. If you knew a bridge was out several miles ahead on a highway with many rushing cars, would you not feel obligated to warn those speeding motorists? I also feel obligated to warn... Colleen | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 5801 Registered: 9-2006  |
One time an old boy, who was Adventist had a prized blue tick hound. He was crossing the creek when all of a sudden a wall of water come crashing down the canyon. He had the blue tick on a leash, and about time the wall of water came crashing down on him, the hound seen a rabbit and jerked him out of the water. The old boy was so thankful for the hound saving his life, and he figured the hound had gotten religion anyhow. Sooo…he went to the Pastor and told him he wanted him to baptize the hound the next Saturday (right after ‘Preparation Day’. The pastor said ,”Son, we don’t baptize blue tick hounds into the Seventh Day Adventist church.” He was adamant about getting his hound baptized, so he went over their heads to the general conference, they told him the same thing. So, he went to the Jehovah’s Witless to get the hound baptized, and they told him the same thing, and run him off. About this time the old boy was getting miffed about the whole thing. So he called a meeting of the general conference and the church, and they all met down at Local church, and began discussing whether it was legitimate or not to baptize a blue tick hound. A few got up and said it would add to their numbers, and one old boy got up and declared as how he thought he thought the dog must have got religion as the dog fertilized his lawn every Saturday morning. So they began to be a split on opinions, the Mormons got wind of it, and sent them a note that if they gave five hundred dollars to the Mormon church, they would baptize the dog, collar, leash and all. So they sent the Mormons a check for five hundred dollars. And announced they would show up with the dog up at the Mormon church, just to get the old boy off their back. So the next Saturday, during church, the general conference showed up to decide what day they would take the dog over. The big heads of the general conference, and three or four pastors got up on the podium to iron the whole mess out. They announced to the old boy that he would have to pay the five hundred dollars to the Mormon Church, seeing as how it was his dog, and they weren't about to foot the bill. The old boy stood up and said as how he would be elated to send them five hundred dollars, as he had intended to donate five thousand dollars to the Adventist church and he was getting off cheap. The pastor jumped up and said, “Son, why didn’t you tell us he was a Adventist dog, give the dog here!” They dunked the dog and read him the 28 fundamentals, the old boy was happy, until his pig jumped out of his arms and saved him from being run over by a truck……. | ||
| Jrt Registered user Username: Jrt Post Number: 909 Registered: 10-2008 |
Ha, ha, ha, River ... Interesting dialogue. I was unaware that there were some SDA places that baptized people apart from membership. Many, many years ago I had a conversation with a gentleman that is now a SDA conference president. The conversation was over whether you should be baptized into Christ or did it need to be baptized into the local congregation. I argued with him that it made sense to baptize into Christ - he argued the opposite that people needed a congregation in which to hold them accountable and to worship with. This thread brought me back to that conversation over 15 years ago. Just another sidelight to this discussion on baptism. I had been studying with a woman and she wanted to be baptized. Because of the senior pastor's stance on women in ministry - he asked that the baptism not be in the church - that I could baptize this woman in a river - which she had requested, BUT I was not to tell anyone or discuss the baptism. Interesting huh ... baptism - which is an outward symbol of an inward heart decision - was to be "quiet", because the one doing the baptism was a woman. Baptism should be a celebration like non other - for it indicates a heart decision to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, His death and resurrection for our sins, which results in eternal life. I had baptized before from a different church at the permission from the conference office. I would have to agree with Colleen and her post above. Whether the baptism is into the SDA Church or an SDA pastor baptizes them into Christ, but they attend an SDA Church - the associations are still the same. The baptized person is attending and worshipping in an SDA Church and therefore will be taught Adventist doctrine - which is heresy. The bridge is out and by their choice of worshipping community - no matter how watered-down the SDA doctrines seem to be presented - the heresy still remains. You cannot be baptized into Christ and then fed heresy in small or large dosages without affecting a person's thinking. Poison still affects a person whether in small or large dosages. I appreciated Gilbert's original post above. Adventism was born out of a heresy that said the God of the universe deceives for divine purposes. Let's just be straight - Adventism teaches a God that lies. This is unBiblical and heretical. Their teaching is that the original prediction that Jesus would return in 1843 and then changed to 1844 was directly orchestrated by God Himself. That God directed the date setting mistake (which is directly apposed to His Word in scripture) so that the pioneers of the SDA religion would eventually come to the doctrine of the IJ (This is found in Ellen White's Book; Early Writings).
This idea that deceit can bring about good purposes is a theme that continues to run through Adventism today. This is why members have no problem "hiding" there membership as they proselytize. This is why they are told to say, "We are from the Blue Bible Book Company" when passing out SDA literature. This is why the SDA line is hidden from view when evangelistic series are started --- deceit will lead to truth (the truth of the doctrines of the Adventist Religion) and that is ok - since it was ok at the conception of this religion. Unfortunately, Adventist "truth" is far from "the Way, the Truth, and the Life" which is Jesus. Bottom line. Deceit can never be used by God to lead to truth. And God does not change His mind.
Anyways, ... Keri | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 10765 Registered: 12-2003 |
Absolutely right on. The realization that Adventism taught that God deceived people for an ulterior motive had seemed logical to me as an Adventist. I remember when I finally read Cultic Doctrine after having studied the Bible for about two years with Richard and the neighbors, praying to know what the Bible really said...and in that book I read that passage again where EGW says that God held His hand over the mistake in reckoning... I realized no true prophet of God would EVER say that God lied in any way. Period. Anyone who claimed to speak for God but attributed deceit to Him must be, by definition, a false prophet--not merely "not a prophet" or "a good devotional writer", but a false prophet. There's no other way to "cut it". Colleen | ||
| 8thday Registered user Username: 8thday Post Number: 1388 Registered: 11-2007  |
My top 11 list why we can't dialogue: How to avoid answering questions you don't want to think about... 1. Present evidence you like that always proves you are right but has nothing to do with the question 2. Ask another question that indicates you don't like how the question was asked or what it implied 3. Present false evidence that discredits the evidence presented to you and ignore requests for documenation. 4. Complain the question is not important. 5. Complain that the inquiring party is being critical by asking the question. 6. Assume and assert the motives of the inquiring party are evil. 7. Attack the questioner with all manner of accusations as to their own spiritual state, puprose for being, and tone of voice. 8. Go back to talking about your favorite point that always proves you are right. 9. Explain away incriminating evidence with faulty but convincing logic 10. Bury the questioning party in a 15 point tirade that will make everyone forget what the question was. 11. Or, simply ignore it altogether and act like you didn't hear it. You know.. I don't mind disagreeing nearly as much as I mind not being able to have a logical conversation. | ||
| Doc Registered user Username: Doc Post Number: 492 Registered: 2-2003 |
Right on Sondra, It is just like that! Adrian | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 5802 Registered: 9-2006 |
That IS the best description of an Adventist that I ever heard! I'm going to cut and paste that in a file and just present it at the outset. It just saves time! I don't feel an obligation to even get involved in such horse feathers with anyone, Adventist or not. Thanks Sondra! River |
