Dear Adventist Friends, can you not d... Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Former Adventist Fellowship Forum » ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS 1 » Dear Adventist Friends, can you not defend your belief without EG White? « Previous Next »

Author Message
Violet
Posted on Friday, May 04, 2001 - 6:49 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I was reading the March/April edition of Proclamation (love it) when I read a letter to the editor. It started out "did you know that you are not the first to believe that the Sabbath is not relevant" then it quoted '"Cain and his descendeants did not respect the day upon which God had rested"'.

Can SDAs not support a point by the Bible? Why must they quote their "prophet"? When I read this I knew where it came from and sure enough PP pg 80 par 3. There was nothing from the Bible.

How are SDAs supose to relate to the outside world if they cannot work from the Bible only. Why can they not see this?
Nate
Posted on Thursday, May 10, 2001 - 5:48 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

This is a problem with many of us who grew up or spent a great deal of time in the SDA system. We got so much imput from EGW that we could not remember where we got what. For example, the idea that Adam was 15 feet tall. Nice conjecture, but not biblical. For those who did not spend a great deal of time in the system of Adventism, This indeed sounds strange, but the whole EGW world view, (primarily an old covenant world view) is so entrenched in the Adventist educational system that many of us grew up thinking it was fact. I am still having to de-program by the study of the word. This is a daily process of immersing my mind in the Word of God. In this way, the truth becomes the norm. Every system must be tested by the word.
I, too, read the letter to Dale, and I was amazed. There was a time I thought that way. I thank God for His setting me free. At the same time, I have compassion for those still steeped in the system. I pray that many will come to a knowledge of truth as it is in Jesus and in His word. The Adventist system is subtle. There are many true Christians in Adventism, but it is a basically fear based system. People are afraid to look at anthing new or different than they have been taught for fear of being deceived. Before an Adventist can break free to study and be open to what they learn, they either have to be disillusioned with the system so as to be open to learn, or they come to a point in their Christian walk that they are not fear based any longer and can trust Christ enough to walk through their fears.

Nate
Maryann
Posted on Friday, May 11, 2001 - 5:56 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hi Nate,

I haven't noticed your name before. If you are new here....WELCOME!!!!;-))

As to the things that we were taught in SDAism, wow, there are many, many things that we thought that were in the Bible that are just simply NOT there!

The last one was that we had been taught that Moses was raised from the dead by God and taken to heaven. That is NOT in the Bible! God may have raised Moses or just Moses' spirit may be in heaven. We simply have NOT been told in the Bible! Isn't that wild?

When I think there will be no more surprises, I get another one! Shake, shake, shake my head.

Maryann...IBC=Insured By Christ
Nate
Posted on Saturday, May 12, 2001 - 3:16 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hi, Maryann!

I like the IBC! Yes I am new to the forum. Thanks for the welcome. The only allusion I know of to Moses possibly being raised from the dead is found in Jude 9. It has to do with Michael the Archangel and the devil disputing over the body of Moses. A strange verse, but one I had looked at as being the scriptural reference. You are right, there is so much that is NOT in the word, that we assumed based on EGW.
What is the most scary addition to scripture for me is constant reference by EGW to the Law being the transcript of God's Character. This gave the law an almost irrefutable position at the center of SDA theology. The problem is, that it is totally NOT biblical. No place in scripture is the Law ever called a transcript of God's character. Instead, Hebrews 1:1-2. "In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things...The Son is the radience of God's glory and the exact representatnion of His being..." The transcript of Gods Character is Jesus!!! NOT THE LAW!!! This is another way EGW misplaced the attention of her readers to the law instead of to grace. I grew up thinking that the law was a guide to God's will for me and should be central to my life. The bible says it was our school master to lead us to Christ... (Gal 3) It was this focus on the law that kept many of us in bondage of what is nothing more than a Galatians heresy. Much of this responsibility rests solely on the shoulders of EGW.

Free In Christ,

Nate
Maryann
Posted on Sunday, May 13, 2001 - 12:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hi Nate,

Yeh, Jude 9 is interesting. Matthew Henry's commentary says that, "Interpreter's are at a loss at what is ment by the body of Moses."

It could mean that Michael the Arch Angel was guarding the body and the devil was trying to steal it?

Do you believe that Christ is Michael? If you do, read Hebrews 1, if you don't, read it
anyway;-))

As a kid, I remember looking off above the horizon for the little black, fist sized cloud that was supposed to be Jesus coming. I would occasionally get excited when I saw a small rain cloud and run in with the announcement that Jesus was coming!

There is a page somewhere on this forum that lists some of the odd ball things we were taught as Bible truth. I may find it one of these days.

Maryann....IBC
Nate
Posted on Sunday, May 13, 2001 - 6:07 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Mary Ann,

I don't know what to make of Michael the Arch Angel. The word Arch means one who is over or can be translated in charge of. So Michael, which means, "Who is like God" and Arch Angel which means "Over all the Angels" could be a Name for Christ. On the other hand, if the meaning "who is like God" were to mean that He is not fully God, It could definitely not be Jesus Christ. So I am not sure. Hebrews one makes it clear who Jesus is. He is divine and the express image of God. He is the transcript of God's character. And, Praise God, our rest is in him. The rest of Hebrews tells us that He is greater than the temple, greater than the sacrifices,Greater than the priesthood, greater than the Law, greater than the prophets, greater than the Sabbath, in fact He is our true Sabbath rest today, and every day, as we rest in Him (Heb 3-4) and He is able to save to the uttermost those who put their trust in Him! (Heb 7:25)
Isn't it great to know our salvation is sure in Him and we can be at rest right now today in the finished work that He performed on the Cross!

God bless...

In Christ,

Nate
Sherry2
Posted on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 11:20 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I think from the reading of Jude 9 it is clear it wasn't Christ...it said Michael the archangel did not dare bring a reviling accusation, but said "The Lord rebuke you." as opposed to Jesus in the wilderness of temptation says Matt. 4 v 10 = Away with you Satan! He does not hesitate to rebuke him personally, rather than in the name of the Lord, and he did not fear ...someone told me that in the greek, the translation is that the angel was afraid to say a word against Satan....that doesn't sound like he would be Jesus, then does it? In fact I was just looking in my word for word Greek, and he was saying My master will admonish you.....

Now I'm going to quote from Lori on this because I think she made a good point to this as well. "I had gone through my concordance and read every reference to Michael the Archangel. The one problem text I first noticed was: Daniel 10:13 ìBut the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.î This was a problem text because Michael was one of something (meaning there is more than one chief prince). Jesus Christ is not like any other; he is unique!! There is only ONE Jesus Christ and so if Michael were another word for Christ then there would have to be only ONE chief prince."


Hope that was helpful to someone.

Blessings!
Colleentinker
Posted on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 4:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Sherry, I've come to the same conclusion for the same reasons. It's amazing how many details we have to think through as if for the first time, isn't it?!

Colleen
Nate
Posted on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 11:30 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Thanks Sherry2 and Lori!

Good insights! I learned something new today! I'm convinced the weight of evidence is against Michael being Jesus. Appreciate your wisdom. God bless you all!

In Christ,

Nate
Sherry2
Posted on Wednesday, May 16, 2001 - 6:51 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Your welcome, Nate. It is a priveledge to help in any capacity those who are making this journey as well! :) God is so good!

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.

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