| Author | Message | ||
| Bruce H |
I have a question for the Evangelical Adventist. Is it a good thing to bring people into the Adventist church with it all its teachings just the way it is today. | ||
| Colleentinker |
Wow, I get so busy grading papers, going to sons' recitals, etc., that I don't log on for a couple of days, and the forum has exploded with fascinating discussion! I can't resist making a comment on the evangelical Adventist subject. Richard and I were definitely evangelical Adventists for several years. We felt burdened to bring the Gospel to our Adventist community. In fact, I believe that God arranged for my position as managing editor for a certain independent SDA publication for a year and a half so I could bring gospel issues to the community's attention. He wanted me to tell the truth about subjects that the church would normally ignore. I've wondered sometimes if the EA phenomenon is part of God's way of "wasting nothing" and "redeeming everything" in his people. As Adventists begin to discover grace, they're not initially ready to make a break. I think nearly everyone who leaves the SDA church because of Jesus goes through a stageósometimes several years longóof witnessing to SDA's. I also believe, however, that truly "evangelical" Adventists ultimately leave. Here's my reason for believing this is so. God leads us to truth, slowly but certainly. The Adventist church is not truth. It is founded on deception. Even though they claim orthodox beliefs (divinity of Jesus, trinity, inspired Word of God, etc.) the reality is that their words don't mean exactly the same things they mean to other Christians. Because the church is founded in deception, Satan has a literal claim on it. I believe that every Adventist has a spiritual claim on his life that keeps then from seeing truth clearly or quickly. That claim is the veil that covers their hearts. Even fully "converted" and freed grace-based Adventists have this claim on them unless they admit it and deal with it. I know we certainly had such a claim on us. We knew we were saved; we were rejoicing in Jesus, but when we realized that we had to renounce Adventism because it was claimed by Satan, something happened that I cannot explain. Our understanding of subtle SDA doctrines began to pop into stark relief against the Bible. Adventism, as Susan said a few posts back, is a cult. Ultimately, even though God may very truly have some of us (at one time or another) working as missionaries to the church, ultimately he will lead us into more and more truth. God's will is that we be completely free of deception. He will free us in His time. In short, I suspect that Evangelical Adventism may be a transitional stage through which God leads us. By the time we reach this stage, we know Christ, and he can use us. He can actually use us to work for him in the church. Ultimately, though, we see that our work there is usually futile, and we leave. I agree with Bruce: we can judge believers, and the Holy Spirit expects us to be perceptive and discerning. And Adventism is a false religion. Ultimately God wants all of our identity to be in him. He even asks us to give him our lingering identity with Adventism. After a long journey as an evangelical Adventist, I realized one day that the church was the "world" God was calling me to leave. I am so thankful to Jesus for bringing me out from the church completely. I am so grateful that he knows how to deal with each of us. And I'm also grateful that he reveals the truth about the church to us and guides us relentlessly to himself. Colleen Tinker | ||
| Lydell |
Very well spoken, Colleen. I rather doubt that anyone here is condemning individuals still in the church, rather it is the entire denomination and what it represents that we condemn. That we easily can judge! As you have pointed out, the truly evangelical Adventists eventually has to leave the congregation. There comes a point where you realize that sitting in a class and making an occassional comment just isn't getting anywhere because of all the garbage that is immediately being piled on top of it. Another thing we have to realize is that our witness to SDA's doesn't stop just because we leave the church. The Internet I think is the most powerful tool the Lord is using to reach those who are still in the church. In the Internet they can annonymously browse and get their questions answered without the fear of who might hear where their thoughts are headed. I think the biggest reason tho that we do have to leave the denomination is because the Lord has so very much more to teach us. He needs our attention uncluttered at some point to take us further in Him. We reached the point after we had left the church that we were constantly dwelling on the question, "well what about the sabbath then?" and it was most definitely getting our attention off the issues that the Lord was wanting to deal with at the time. Finally he literally gave us a vision (proof that he has a sense of humor I think!) that he wanted us to set down "the box" containing that question and follow Him. He also told us we would get back to it later. And that was exactly what he did...in HIS time, not ours. Looking back now I can realize that for me personally, He had to have my attention off the sabbath and the SDA baggage so that he could deal with a deep soul hurt I had experienced. It literally took all my energy and focus just to face the process he took me through in healing that thing. The process was step by step over nearly a year. And part of that process was tearing down the wall of suspicion of other believers that SDA carry around with them unknowingly. He had to take me to the point of being willing to be vulnerable to "their" help. It was a very humbling thing to have "those people" who "if they were truly Christians would surely be keeping the sabbath" lovingly minister to me even through stuff when they didn't have a clue what to say to help me because I was unable to even put it into words. Anyway, my point is, God has to remove our distractions and put us in a place where we can start fresh without the continual barrage of error being fed to us. | ||
| Ernie |
Colleen: Well said! That's what I have been trying to convey in my seminars and lectures on Adventism. We love our friends and relatives so much, that we have to tell them the truth about the dangers of Adventism. When you speak of Adventism founded on deception, it breaks my heart to think of how many people I led into Adventism. In other words, I led them into deception. That's why I have been preaching and teaching all over the world the theological deceptions of Adventism. Please, pray for our ministry. God bless you, Ernie | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Bruce, Colleen, Lydell, Ernie: Dear Bruce, Thanks for the highly insightful question. I think you may be addressing it to me, although I am not an Evangelical Adventist and donít even claim the term ìEvangelicalî as a label on the front or the back of my sweatshirt. Nor do I claim the term "Adventist," for I am not one with a capital A, just as I am not an "Evangelical" with a capital C. I am a Christian with nothing added, nothing taken away, no subtle shadings of meaning, nothing else. But to your question: Q. ìIs it a good thing to bring people into the Adventist church with it all its teachings just the way it is today?î A. No. I think it is a good thing to bring people OUT of the Adventist church, even if they donít join another denomination. The true church (ecclesia) is composed of all people with Christ in their hearts. My biggest problem is dealing with Adventists who seem never to have had Christ anywhere in their hearts. When they leave the church -- and, in North America, at least, they seem to be leaving in record numbers -- they truly do go off the deep end. But then again, maybe that's all right. Maybe they need that for a time before Christ can finally approach them in a real way. I don't know. God is sovereign, not me. Dear Colleen, Thanks for the great summation. You seem to have this great calming effect on people. Itís a spiritual gift. I was especially interested in what you call ìa stage ñ sometimes several years long ñ of witnessing to SDAís.î Thatís interesting because, as I think you already know, I started attending the Presbyterian Church in the summer of 1984, and I have been attending both Adventist and non-Adventist churches ever since. Thatís over 15 years in this stage! Do you think Iíll ever emerge? I should also like to point out that in the main the early church attended worship on both days, originally in the synagogues of the Jewish Diaspora or dispersion communities. And this practice may not have changed. It did because of the enmity that developed between the Romans and the Jews culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Gentile Christian citizens of the Roman Empire, especially in the capitol city, Rome itself, were in enough trouble as it was, and did not want to associate themselves with the Jews and invite even more persecution! This was but one factor that led to Sunday-only worship, but it may have been the most important one. The idea that the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) changed the day of worship cannot be supported historically for many reasons, but primarily because there was no Roman Catholic Church at that time. Today the RCC continues to claim to have changed the day. And SDAs have been trumpeting that claim for them for 1.5 centuries! There was a Christian Church of Rome with its own bishop, called the Bishop of Rome, but the RCC itself as we think of it today did not develop until centuries later. The claim that Peter was the first pope was then projected backward in history and impressed upon Scripture. "But in the beginning it was not so." Along this line, I'm itching to review Samuele Bacchiocchi's FROM SABBATH TO SUNDAY on www.formeradventist.com to show how he impresses the SDA archtypical view onto HISTORY as well as onto Scripture. Dear Lydell, I appreciate your deliberative judgment. I agree that ìit is the entire [SDA] denomination and what it represents that we condemn.î Thank you for the glimpse into your personal experience. Dear Ernie, Thank you for this testimony: ìWhen you speak of Adventism founded on deception, it breaks my heart to think of how many people I led into Adventism.î But now you are leading them out! Praise God! May God continue to lead us all in the paths of righteousness for his nameís sake, Jude | ||
| Timo K. |
Bruce, I would be very careful bringing people to any Church without a clear warning about the division of the Body of Christ. In my opinion the enemy is very happy that different (often minor) doctrines "divide" the ONE AND ONLY BODY OF CHRIST. Since there is a real Invisible Church, why not regard Her as our Spiritual Home? In my opinion there is only ONE shut door free Church, the Invisible Church. That is the Bride of Christ. We all are Kingly Priests in that Church sent to different "visible" churches to proclaim Jeesus OUR BRIDEGROOM. Our Bridegroom has only one Bride (the invisible Church). All the visible "shut door churces" are witnessig places. God does not only send us to evangelize the world, He also gives us authority to proclaim the unity of the Body of Christ. Why then do I call myself an EA or evangelical Pentacostalist or evangelical Lutheran? Simple because all visible churches are a "mission field" for preparing the Bride for more and more visual unity (as Jesus prayed for). The world needs Jesus and those who have Jesus need unity in the Spirit. Paul write in 1.Cor.9:20 "And unto the Jew I become as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, us under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; (21) to them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ), that I might gain them that are without law. We are so used to think divided Churches as real Churches, that we even start feeling at home in these denominations, and forget that there are no division of Christ. Shut Door is the Spirit of Division. There is no idea starting to build so perfect visible church, that we can build a wall around and protect the suprime doctrines from outside influence. Not even evangelical doctrines are ground for a wall with a shut door. The Invisible Church has to go to all the world and all the visible churches (since they are also part of wordly organisations) timo | ||
| Allenette |
Jude: (I dont post here very often --be glad--be very glad gggggg) just wondered if you could elaborate on the "DEEP END" that formers are said to fall off into? Would you agree that the deep end is still pretty shallow, with regards to your average SDA experience vs. "the world"? IOW, it wouldnt take MUCH to be considered "off the deep end", after SDA. Seems to me that the usual deep end is rejecting petty stuff like no movies, or no coffee, or heaven forbid, having a glass of wine...the usual no-no's. (Wearing jewelry, makeup, RED DRESSES having gone the way of the dinosaur--oops I forgot, they were all drowned in the flood :-). It has been my experience that those who "come back", miss the social/cultural (there's that cult word again) part of SDA, having been so cocooned from normal society. they miss basking in the communal effect, and will give up those (fake) "sinful" habits for the inclusion into the social group they are used to/comfortable with, at least that's what happened to the "backsliders" (ggg) in my SDA family. IOW, they just couldnt 'make it' in the regular social world they were born into. I would say that of the SDA family members I know, that left, didnt REALLY leave over doctrine (they didnt study that diligently anyway, like SO MANY members) they just felt strangled by the rules/regs. I, on the other hand, consider myself a non-believer, as having studied the doctrines and found them "wanting", rejected it. I feel so much better now (GGGG). meant friendly, Allenette :-) |
