| Author | Message | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
HAS FAF BECOME TOO AGGRESSIVE? If you are still a Seventh-day Adventist, your input is sought here. Not that the input of anyone who no longer considers him/herself an SDA isn't, for you are just as welcome to post also. Here's my concern: I have recently been gently cautioned for being ìa bit militant,î though understandably so. Mild chastisement compared to some Iíve received personally, and some FAF leadership has received in private correspondence. Probably the scariest thing thatís happened so far is very heavy-handed and clearly unethical pressure being applied behind the backs of FAF leaders by two SDA church officials at key and politically sensitive positions in the hierarchy. They wanted us to change our name to get ìAdventistî out of ìFormer Adventist Fellowship.î But they didnít have the courage to ask us directly. Instead they used veiled threats. You know the drill: the "stainless steel" hand sheathed in the "black-and-blue velvet" glove. I know Iíve mentioned this before. But since then Iíve had time for further reflection. And Iíve come up with this thought: The two officials were so high up and the covert action was so smoothly conducted, that there had to have been approval and coordination from even higher: It is entirely possible that the General Conference president himself was briefed and gave assent. All of which brings us back to you, the Seventh-day Adventist layperson, who obviously would know nothing of this if you were not informed by FAF. What is YOUR opinion? Have we been too aggressive? I will say this: If Ishmael thinks that I, Jude, have personally been a bit too ìmilitantî here, what must he think of all the: (1) ìrefugee SDAsî who have forthrightly told their personal experiences here? (2) ìrecovering SDAsî who have courageously sought our help? (3) ìspiritually frustrated SDAsî who have righteously challenged us here? It seems to me that the question is not so much one of aggression or militancy as it is of necessity. Hear Paul (1 Corinthians 9:16 NIV): ìYet when I preach the gospel, I cannot boast, for I am compelled to preach. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!î For if we are to believe Paul, then how can we in good conscious keep silent? Or how can we follow such advice as, ìNow make ënice niceí for the sake of almighty public relations!î Or why should we change our name just to pacify someoneís octogenarian maiden great-aunt who learned to surf the Internet, ran across our website, and was horrified and took exceedingly great offense? I for one DO NOT consider the following argument ñ which was recently posted -- to be compelling: ìObviously 7th-Day Adventist evangelists are continuing with the deception of preaching a false gospel. Sad, isn't it? Nevertheless, there will be 7th-day Adventists in Heaven and they are saved even right now.... My mind set is unfortunately terribly subjective and therefore I find that I must be careful about how vigorously I respond (attack?) their doctrinal positions.î Let me hasten to make myself crystal clear: I have no bone to pick with the conscientious convictions of this individual or, indeed, of anyone who reaches or agrees with such a position as that just quoted. But I do think that if what I consider to be an essentially supine position becomes the norm among former Adventist Christ-followers, then something is seriously wrong with the gospel! For was it not a towering apostlic figure who wrote (1 Peter 2:7-8 NIV): ìNow to you who believe, this stone [Christ Jesus] is precious. But to those who do not believe, ëThe stone the builders rejected has become the capstone,í and ëa stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall.í They stumble because they disobey the message ñ which [stumbling] is also what they were destined for.î And if I ever believed anything in my life, I believe this: Any self-confessed Christ-follower who believes he must do something ñ anything at all ñ in order to ìget readyî for Christ to come in the clouds is no true Christian at all! And to hold world-wide ìevangelisticî efforts to convince true Christ-followers of that same false gospel ["Get ready!"] is to not only stumble on that stone themselves, but -- worse, much worse ñ to cause others to stumble and fall as well: ìbecause they disobey the message.î And so, my Adventist friend, Are you ready for Jesus to come again? And if not, do you support your churchís ìevangelisticî efforts to convince true Christ-followers that theyíre not ready either? Or if you personally are ready, do you speak out against your churchís efforts to convince ìhonest in heart,î born-again Christians that theyíre really not? Maybe the time has finally come to ìjust come right out and say itî: ìFallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great, which made all the nations drink the maddening wine of her adulteries.î Revelation 14:8 NIV. What do you think, my Adventist friend? And no -- just to make certain there can be no misunderstanding what is at stake here -- let me repeat that message: "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved -- you and your household." Acts 16:31 NIV. Ready without the Sabbath, Jude | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Jude, Thank you for taking that lead. That took a lot of courage. I'll fall in behind you. Now, you said: "Any self-confessed Christ-follower who believes he must do something ñ anything at all ñ in order to ìget readyî for Christ to come in the clouds is no true Christian at all!" Would you agree with this statement? We don't "do something" to "get ready", we "do something", praise God, "BECAUSE WE ARE READY"! Keep onward and upward. Maryann | ||
| Maryann |
Hi all of our SDA friends, It's really funny that this thread showed up right now because George asked me to re-post his post specifically to SDAs. He sincerely wants to know where the below post disagrees with the doctrine of the SDA Church. He would really like an SDA pastor to reply, but any and all replies are definitely invited. ################################################# "If we are not worried about the things we do, we are worried about how we do them. What a good way for the devil to get at us. Big sins, little sins, conscious sins, unconscious sins, premeditated and spontaneous sins, which ones did He not die for. Notice I said which ones did He NOT die for." "Think about it, if you can find one sin that He didnít die for, our salvation is not perfect and we are in big trouble, and perhaps this is all just a big joke." "Go ahead, find me one single thing we can do that He didnít die for!!! Please do. Really." "Now, if it is not something that we do that keeps us out of heaven, then what is left. Thatís right, it is something that we do NOT do." "The only thing I can see that He didnít die for is unbelief . This He can not forgive if we continue in it. It is when we do not believe He died for everything that we could ever do, that we are lost." "No one can know if or when another is saved, that is between them and God. ìBy their fruits ye shall know themî says to me that if we are really and truly saved we will not WANT to go around sinning all the time. If I always go around doing those things that are inconsistent with salvation, I would question whether I had been truly saved to begin with." ################################################# George has suffered all his life with guilt and has lived in constant fear of God. (George was raised in the SDA Church) Now, he has met his Savior, a wonderful, loving God. I believe that the above post demonstrates that he now has believed! Finally, after all these years, he KNOWS that he is loved by God. I too, want to extend an invitation to any SDA that reads his post to please show where they disagree and why. Maryann | ||
| Bruce H |
Maryann -----We don't "do something" to "get ready", we "do something", praise God, "BECAUSE WE ARE READY"! ------ AMEN!!!!!!! AMEN!!!!!! AMEN!!!!!!!! There is Power and confidence (in) our God. He takes away all fear. YOU CAN SHOUT IT TO THE ROOF TOPS. Bruce Heinrich BH B | ||
| Bruce H |
Maryann I believe God has somthing real special planned you Maryann His hand is on you. I want to thank you for what you have given me | ||
| Maryann |
Hey Guys and Gals, You can't believe what you guys have helped me let God do for me! 1)Letting people be your crutch is sorta a cop out. 2)Letting people kick your crutch out from under you hurts. 3)Letting people boot you in the hind side after they have kicked your crutch out from under you is Hmmmmmmmmmm Grrrrrrrrr good for you! I figure I'm still around 2 or 3, still occasionally squealing for that blasted comfortable crutch. It's between me and God, huh? Bruce......Thank you for the encouragement. Actually, I needed that. Onward and upward.....Maryann | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Hi Maryann, Just finished watching the 2d installment of "Jesus" on TV. Must confess I didn't like it as well as I liked "Gospel According to Matthew," which I saw on tape last Easter at an FAF meeting. Thought they let "production values," in particular the digitally and dramatically enhanced "action scenes," such as the incident of Peter trying to walk on the water, "take over" too much. Also thought the totally gratuous (i.e., non-biblical) and time-eating scenes of Romans partying, joking and pranking around were a waste of my time. As Queen Victoria of England once reposted, "We are not amused." Well, enough of that.... To your question: "Would you agree with this statement? We don't 'do something' to 'get ready,' we 'do something,' praise God, 'BECAUSE WE ARE READY!'" Short answer: Yes. Longer answer: That's why I've been harping about what Paul is saying in Romans 7 and 8, and what John is saying in 1 John 1 and the first part of chapter 2. And to put your question in its context, consider this: Imagine yourself to be a professional, salaried, long-time SDA evangelist, such as Lonnie Malashenko, Doug Batchelor, Morrie Venden, Ken Cox, Dwight Nelson (on and off), etc. Now -- while saying and assuming nothing at all about these named examples -- imagine that deep down you don't really believe that you yourself are ready for Jesus to come. Now it is YOUR JOB to be the FEATURED SPEAKER at 3ABN's upcoming "The Midnight Cry: Chicago" (a real downlink actually scheduled to run Sept. 9 to Oct. 14, 2000) or some similar "evangelistic effort," such as worldwide satellite networked "Revelation Seminar" or "Net 2000-Something." Now, because of your official beliefs of your church you don't really believe you yourself are ready, you still have to preach to all Greater Chicago or even "all the networked world" that EVERYBODY ELSE ON THE PLANET HAD BETTER GET READY FOR JESUS TO COME BEFORE IT IS FOREVER TOO LATE! Quite a dilemma, huh? Believe me, I do not envy these men. And my concern has nothing to do with my trying to play God and read their minds and make judgments about the state of their souls. My concern is to imagine myself in that predicament. Or to ask you, Maryann, to do so. How would you feel? What would you think? How would you pray in the privacy of your own heart? Obviously, these are rhetorical questions. And I even ASK you not to "spill your guts" here. I only ask you to ponder in your own heart the consequences of being in this position. And I think that if you do, being the Christian person that I know you are, you will begin to feel some pity for them. That you will begin to pray for them. That you may even begin to understand a little of what Dale Ratzlaff has been through. Or I. For even though I was in a much less visible position, I often had similar problems. I had difficulty reconciling what I myself believed about myself -- "I know I'm not ready" -- with what I was preaching and publishing for others! That THEY must get ready even though I knew down deep I WASN'T! And that ONLY because I believed I had to stand before God the Father sinless and without a mediator -- meaning without Christ! Do you see what is at stake here? Do you see what the Adventist people are going to have to go through if they keep going in this direction? I do shudder for them. I still love them. I feel their need the unmixed gospel. That is the only thing that will get them to drop the "Sabbath test" baggage and the "you've got to be sinless without Christ" horror. But I myself can only follow my Lord. Blessing you, Maryann. And peace as you undergo your surgery, Jude | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Jude, I guess we were busy doing the same thing, hen pecking the keyboard in a mad attempt to post before midnight. I will re-read your post tomorrow. But at this time I will comment on one thing: YES, YES, YES, I understand. One thing I have always been able to do is understand, look at and feel the other person in an array of situations. Sometimes, I can actually feel the pain. Sometimes I feel like I will literally EXPLODE in a million pieces when I can't say or do what I think I should. Yet I still feel the pain. Oh well, I got a high tolerance ;-) Thank you for your reply.......Maryann | ||
| graham |
Jude the Obscure: In order to respond to your post of May 17, 2000 about being too aggressive and militant I think that you need to be very specific as to what you mean by being too aggressive.....is it this web site itself or is it specific information contained within the web site? The story of the 2 officials sounds like some type of weird conspiracy from a movie. Is it possible that your imagination has been over-active? Interested in hearing your response.... Graham | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Hi Graham, Nice to hear from you. Welcome to the website. Hope you stay around. There have been a few who have posted here accusing us of having bad motives for "criticizing" (read, "disagreeing with") the teachings and practices of the SDA church from which in one way or another we have all sprung. Some have objected to the name. Others have objected to the content. As far as the other situation is concerned, I would say only that no, my imagination has not been working time-and-a-half. Beyond saying that, what's already been said about the two hierarchs will have to suffice. Thanks for asking the questions and listening to the answers. Could you tell us a little more about yourself? Jude | ||
| Colleentinker |
Hi, Graham! Welcome. I just want to confirm that Jude tells the truth! Colleen | ||
| Richard, Jr. |
I received a copy of "Our Firm Foundation" today. I have not received a copy of that "stupendous" magazine in years. Has any one else received it? It appears that they have sent out a mass mailing to anyone who has been connected to Adventism. | ||
| Steve |
Hi Richard Jr., Yes, I got mine yesterday. I've been looking at it in amazement. It's a full frontal attack on all that is good in Christianity. I was going to post some of the stuff from it, but I must admit, it almost made me physically ill. Is that a common response? After believing some of that (not all of it) for so many years, I'm amazed at it after having discarded all those distinctives. That issue is so full of the Us vs. Them mentality. Even though I know the SDA church officially rejects what Ron Spears is saying in that magazine, he is really preaching the SDA gospel. I only came to the church 15 years ago, but Spears is teaching exactly the same thing I was presented with. Perhaps Spears does it in a less subtle way, but it is exactly what I was taught. I do think you're right. It seems to be a mass mailing to anyone associated with the church. A thought -- perhaps the church provided him with all our names (at a cost of course) so that we could receive the "Truth" without the church having to look so militant. I must admit, I'm getting more and more suspicious every day of anything that reeks of so much SDA theology. Of course, Spears, the "old" John Osborne, the Eternal Gospel Church of SDA, etc. are all preaching the SDA truth. It's the GC that is denouncing these folks, trying to look good, while at the same time, preaching the same Bad News. The stuff on the Three Angels messages, the "Spirit of Prophecy" (blasphemy), and the 144,000 is downright repulsive to any thinking person. (Maybe that's why I felt so ill, I was obviously not a thinking person and fell for the lie.) Some of the other articles include, "Am I One of God's Peculiar People?", "The Shaking and the Latter Rain" (by Colin Standish), "The True Church" (that one is really off base, maybe I'll post something on that article), "Health Reform" (of course), "Our Prophetic Times", "Reform in 7th Day Sabbath Observance" (by none other than EGW herself), and "Into the Ranks of Spiritualism". Although some mention is made, there is no clear message of our free gift of Salvation in Jesus Christ, His perfect and COMPLETE atonement FOR us (rather than as an EXAMPLE for us), the true Reformation theology, is seriously lacking. It's amazing more of us didn't end up in the Spears, or Osborne camps. Of course, they have captured a lot of folks. And others have gone, because they realize that it's pure SDAism to the core. The church wants it both ways. It wants to denounce people who stray from the church, while at the same time, preach the same Bad News they are preaching. I hope anyone receiving this "Firm Foundation" issue, is not deceived. For that is exactly what it is -- Pure, Satanic Deception. It is intended to lead people away from their salvation in Jesus, to Another Gospel, which is not a Gospel at all. Shame on Ron Spears. May God have mercy on his soul. | ||
| Richard, Jr. |
Hi Steve, Great post! You mentioned SDA's want it both ways. In my experience that is how I found it too. In my opinion they use "doublespeak". That is a phrase George Orwell used in either "1984" or in "Animal Farm." They can use the same word but have an entirely different meaning. My wife has gotten physically sick from reading OFF or some Amazing Facts mag. They of the give us your jewelry so we can sell it to pagans with the hope we can convert those pagans and then they can give us that same jewelry so we can resell it to a new batch of pagans, and on and on it would go. I don't get physically sick from reading heterodox material but I have come very close from becoming mentally ill a couple of times. I would indent paragraphs but I haven't caught the trick yet. You mentioned the "old John Osborne." I read his confession a couple years ago and except for the fact that he has given up being so critical of SDA leadership his theology has remained somewhat the same. Let me know if I have the right read on that. I think the best way I can summarize my reaction to receiving OFF yesterday is to say that "this is the Adventism we have known and loved." | ||
| Cas |
After reading the posts of you guys saying you received the special edition of Our Firm Foundation I wondered if I would also. Yup, I checked my mail and sure enough I must still be in the club. I don't know why I put myself through this anger and depressed state by reading it, but I wanted to see what it was all about. I learned something new that I don't remember hearing before about spritualism. I will quote from the article Into the Ranks of Spiritualism on pg.8 "Who is sounding the trumpet? Who is warning the people that spiritualism will soon break upon us with a magnitude that may deceive the very elect? DO YOU REALIZE THAT DEMON SPIRITS IN THE FORM OF WELL KNOWN, DECEASED CHRISTIANS WILL SOON URGE THE KEEPING OF THE FALSE SABBATH AND WILL SECOND THE TESTIMONY OF THE RELIGIOUS TEACHERS OF THE DAY?". "Communications from the spirits will declare that God has sent them to convince the rejectors of Sunday of their error, affirming that the laws of the land should be obeyed as the law of God. They will lament the great wickedness in the world and second the testimony of religious leaders that the degraded state of morals is caused by the DESECRATION OF SUNDAY". GC 588, 590-591. "the Spirit of Prophecy has also told us that SDA ministers in the "open air" will urge upon the people the necessity of keeping the first day of the week" "Does this mean that apostate SDA's will turn us in to the Catholics? Ellen White was shown in vision that "the nominal chruch and nominal SDA's like Judas, would betray us to the Catholics to obtain their influence to come against the truth. "The saints will then be an obscure people, little known to the Catholics; but the churches and nominal Adventists who know of our faith and customs...will betray the saints and report them to the Catholics as those who disregard the institutions of the people; that is, that they keep the Sabbath and disregard Sunday." Unpublished manuscript. Testimonies 1. And as usual another uplifting postivie note from the pen of inspiration. "I was shown the STARTLING fact that but a small portion of those who now profess the truth will be sanctified by it and be saved". Test. 1, 608. I used to read statements like the one above and feel so unworthy, thinking I would never be saved, because I probably was not "good enough". This is the insecurity Ellen White always left me with, and probably still haunts me to this day. Any of you who read this article tell me one place where it speaks about a relationship with the Lord. Jesus is completely overlooked and it all evolves around a day. Unbelievable. Can you believe most of us here at one time supported this nonsense. I do not remember the teaching about people coming back from the dead to promote sunday keeping. Does this sound like the Outer limits or what! I should probably trash this magazine because It is too upsetting for me to read it. The curiousity usualy prevails though! God Bless everyone. ~CAS~ | ||
| Colleentinker |
Perhaps I should be grateful that we didn't get the above mentioned mailing. Maybe (in spite of the fact that we still receive the PU Conf. Recorder) our names have actually been removed from the "official" list! Richard, Jr's observation about John Osborn's change of heart are accurate to the best of my knowledge. A year or so ago he had an article in the Review in which he told his story about becoming convicted, while reading EGW in preparation for a video shoot, that he had wandered from truth by opposing the church. His opposition, of course, had been from the extreme right perspective. He repented and returned to the official fold, repenting of his opposition and now lending his support to the official church. The church's current moves to "revision" itself is its latest realization of its inherent deception. Publicly, EGW is mentioned very little. Several large SDA churches do not mention her in their statements of belief on their websites. In fact, have you noticed that when the church publish her picture in church publications, they almost never publish actual photographs anymore? They publish drawings which soften her mouth and eyes. The piercing eyes and hard, set mouth are gone. The drawings of her look soft, happy, and warm unlike almost all her photographs. When Adventist Today published her photograph on its cover a couple of years ago, that cover received more complaints than any other cover it ever ran besides the issue on abuse which featured a photoshop-enhanced picture of a child with a "bruised" eye. The picture of EGW was borrowed from the Heritage Room in the LLU Library. It was not airbrushed or enhanced in any way except for the photoshop addition of a source of light coming from the upper right corner of the picture. Her eyes looked piercing and hard. The non-SDA printer of the magazine commented that the crew of helpers who stuffed return envelopes into the mag had commented that her eyes looked like "snake-eye" and joked among themselves that they were enough to give them nightmares. Interesting reaction to a picture we all grew up seeing, and to which we all had become desensitized! | ||
| Darrell |
I received the Our Firm Foundation special also. It went directly from the mailbox to the trash. I don't have time to disect lies and would much rather focus on the truth. | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
I never received a copy of OUR FIRM FOUNDATION. I'm a bit hurt at being overlooked. God's in control, however, and he caused a hardest-of-hard-core historical Adventist (HOHCHA) at my Wednesday evening Bible-study-fellowship-and-prayer group to bring one -- appropriately preserved in a plastic sleeve -- and showed it to me. I read as much as I could in the brief time that I had (he wanted it back right away). I didn't see anything in it I hadn't already seen a hundred times before. But at least I saw a copy of that "collector's edition." Jude | ||
| guest |
Hi all! I just was reading a few things on this site and was courious about this one statement so I thought I would just ask. If you don't mind, please explain... I don't understand what this means. Jude the Obscure wrote May 17 - 3:54pm: "Probably the scariest thing thatís happened so far is very heavy-handed and clearly unethical pressure being applied behind the backs of FAF leaders by two SDA church officials at key and politically sensitive positions in the hierarchy. They wanted us to change our name to get ìAdventistî out of ìFormer Adventist Fellowship.î But they didnít have the courage to ask us directly. Instead they used veiled threats. You know the drill: the "stainless steel" hand sheathed in the "black-and-blue velvet" glove." It sounds to me as though you feel threatened. If so... how so? | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Dear Guest, Would you mind telling us a little bit about yourself? Jude | ||
| Seethroughyou |
Jude, Answer the question without deflection. It's a simple question that you evade like a typical Adventist or former Adventist. Always trying to control the dialogue. You haven't yet unlearned Adventist evasion. Who threatened whom? And name the names and the circumstances. Otherwise, you are indulging in a soap opera. | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Gary, Good to see you. Maryann | ||
| Question |
The above is not me - sorry to disappoint you. Do I sound like that? Hardly. Gary | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves. Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord. Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. Share with God's people who are in need. Practice hospitality. Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited. Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord. On the contrary: "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head." Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. --St. Paul, Romans 12:9-21 NIV. ^^^^^^^^^^^ STILL not under law and holding, Jude | ||
| Jude the obscure |
Seethroughyou, What you are doing, or trying to do, is evil. And somebody has to have the guts to tell you, and not just to hint around. So I'm telling you. It is evil and it has no place on a genuinely Christian website, such as this one. I'm sorry, but I'm speaking the truth to you. Do with it what you will. In Christ alone, Jude | ||
| Guest |
Hi Jude, First of all, I would like to assure you that I am no threat! I am no one of notability and pretty much non remarkable. I just felt that the way your opening statement to this thread was phrased is highly charged emotionally. Without anything specific to verify, qualify or establish reason or intent then it is insitefull and smacks of militant propoganda. I am not saying this because I think that is what you are doing but there are many who would respond to the suggestions implied as though they are fact when in reality without knowing and being privy to details are just implied. If I respond to such terms as "veiled threats" and "covert action" - a whole lot of emotional dynamics start forming and set the stage for... well history speaks well enough for all the potentials. On the other hand, I am not saying that what you are suggesting is not so. But the results of implied accusations and the notion of being threatened can yield unstable results. | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Dear Guest, What standing do you have to receive this information? | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
And why do you feel you have to use intimidative, exploitative, even bullying techniques in order to extract it? | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
And what do you propose to do with it if you do succeed in obtaining it? | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
One thing more before you respond. I would point out that the terms you have chosen to use in your explanatory reponse -- "insiteful," "smacks of militant propoganda," "implied accusations" and "the notion of being threatened" -- are far more inflamatory than the terms I used in my original post. The reason: they are based on nothing but your imagination, and a rather dark imagination at that! My terms were based on fact. Furthermore, I have witnesses -- very respectable witnesses, people of good standing and unquestioned integrity in the community where the activity took place. One of these, Colleen, already testified on this website to the truth of my statement. And if you read all of the thread before you posted, you would have read her testimony. I really don't think you have anything much upon which to base your accusation that my post tended to incite people. One last thing: In a court of law, the truth always the best offense and/or defense. For I have spoken truth and if I need to I can prove it in a court of law. And for that reason alone, FAF has nothing to fear from the SDA church in terms of defamation, slander or libel. Sincerely, Jude | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Dear Guest/Seethroughyou, I now believe you are not going to respond at all. And for that reason I need to add one more observation before I consider this "case" closed. FAF is not a sandbox in which diapered two-year-olds may fight over plastic red fire trucks and throw sand at each other. FAF is serious business. And if we do not respond to covert actions taken against us by the SDA church, then they are more likely to continue. And I suspect that you know as well as I do that such activity has a very long and exceedingly rich history within the SDA church. My intent is not to publicise it, but to end it as much as possible, at least insofar as it affects us. In Christ's grace alone, Jude | ||
| guest |
Dear Jude, My apologies. I will answer your questions: Re:"What standing do you have to receive this information?" answer: None "why do you feel you have to use intimidative, exploitative, even bullying techniques in order to extract it?" answer: That was not my intention; I was relaying my impression and some of my thoughts related to the impression that I personally had. Not saying that I was right - hence the question in the first place. "And what do you propose to do with it if you do succeed in obtaining it?" answer: Actually, nothing. You have assumed that I am what and whom I am not. I respect what you say Jude. I did not come on here as the enemy just a question. I do not demand an answer. I respect this forum and the representatives. Just a traveler looking for Foot Prints. | ||
| Seethroughyou |
Hi Ya Jude, Coming from you, my "doing" being called evil will be taken as a compliment. FAF is your sandbox and you are the chief of the fire engine. Okay? I am well aware and have read the previous posts and the confirmation by Colleen Tinker. It is as simple as this: When I left SdAtown,, one of my vows was to NEVER take an implied, inferred, or undocumented statement as TRUTH unless FULL DISCLOSURE was forthcoming. (BTDT) If FAF in the person of you and/or Colleen Tinker, do not wish to provide all relevant information and full disclosure as to some type of threat, so be it. (Your website, your sandbox, etc.) I have no ax to grind with you, Colleen Tinker, etc.. Being fully and totally exposed to SdA aphorisms, (does "trust me" ring a bell), it is disingenuous at best for you to utilize the same mechanisms of the "SdA Brethren". Enjoy your paranoia, and your deflection capabilities. "The Evil One-who doesn't covet your sandbox or anything in it." (ggg) | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Guest, I forgive you, of course. Also I need to ask your forgiveness for thinking that you and Seethroughyou were one and the same person. Many blessings to you, Jude | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Dear Seethroughyou, Many blessings to you as you vaya con Dios, Jude | ||
| Question - Gary |
Remember -- seethroughyou and Guest are not the same person as Question. Do we copy that? I am so confused I might start posting with my real name again. I at one time thought Jude was Ralph. That is still well within the possible range, but I do not care any longer. My only wish now is that we all hold hands, forgive each other for everything and go home to Christ when the season is full. | ||
| Colleentinker |
Jude the Obscure is not Ralph! In fact, Jude has revealed his true identity on another thread within the last 24 hoursÖ | ||
| guest |
What should be revealed is the details as to how this forum and web site was "threatened" by the "official" denomination. If it is no big deal then remove the thread and the accusations. Vague nondescript accusations will diminish you're entire mission and credibility. | ||
| Max Gordon Phillips |
Dear Guest, Your suggestions are much appreciated. However, your chances of finding out the facts you desire by the tactics you have chosen to use are about as great as those of a snowman on the surface of the sun. You're welcome to keep trying, however. Meanwhile, blessings to you, Max | ||
| guest |
Hi Max, I have no agenda really. And I am not using "tactics" just saying it the way I see it. Really, I am not as interested in finding out the "facts" as I am the direction that this is taking. IMHO I have been accused now of using harsh tactics amoung other things. I am at a loss! What are you saying... just "trust me" that it is so? (As someone else mentioned on this thread.) I am not here as a representive or supporter of the denomination. Don't throw it out if your not going to back it up! | ||
| Glen D. |
Why are you guys so testy with "Guest"? Guest wants to know the basis of your accusations, and it's made me curious too. If you're worried about suits or whatever, just say so. | ||
| GlenE |
I agree with Max | ||
| Glen D. |
I don't know if you've gotten too aggressive, but the smarm level is high. I guess if you can amuse yourselves, why amuse anyone else? | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Guest, You said: "I have been accused now of using harsh tactics amoung other things. I am at a loss!" I did a no limit on time, keyword search for the phrase "harsh tactics" and the only place it was used in the entire history of this Forum is when you used it! Max said: "Your suggestions are much appreciated. However, your chances of finding out the facts you desire by the tactics you have chosen to use are about as great as those of a snowman on the surface of the sun." Max did not accuse you of "HARSH" tactics! You and you alone said it! Maryann | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Glen D, Welcome to the Forum. It appears that you have just found this site or have been reading for sometime but have just now posted? What is your story? I'm sure everyone would like to hear it. Sometimes there is "history" that is not apparent to a new reader. Sometimes one can make what seems to be a reasonable assumption and be wrong simply because they don't know the history. Nuff said about that. Hope to hear more from you. Maryann | ||
| Glen D. |
Oh, I'm just sniffing around. An ex-Adventist who believes in essentially nothing--I'm taking a course in post-modern philosophy at Gonzaga University right now. I got bored arguing about Pantera at the Pantera Sucks site, then bored with Slate, and thought I'd see what EGW has wrought. It seems a period of false steps, misapprehensions, and a fair bit of emotion on both sides. Why not? | ||
| Maryann |
Hi again Glen, Hope you "sniff" around enough to ask some of the great questions that I know you have and even more importantly, I'll bet you have some really great statements. One of our most interesting occasional participants is Allenette. Real sharp gal. She relates really well to your statement: "An ex-Adventist who believes in essentially nothing--" Sooo, how about it? Later.....Maryann | ||
| guest |
Hi Maryann, You are right, no one used the word "harsh" but me. Well... once again I meet up with cold evasion to a question. It is not the first time... it seems to me that I am viewed as hostile. (deep sigh) If I respond to 90% of your message of Grace and Assurance in Christ but have a question over here or over there that someone in high and good standing within the ranks has said... defenses go up and barriers are put in place. Sound familiar?? IOW - Don't question, I have degrees and I quote scripture. If you don't want to accept that what I am telling you as truth then just go away, or maybe you just need to study more and you will see things the way I am telling you. You know Max, Re: "a snowman on the surface of the sun"... you think it's possible? | ||
| Bruce H |
Guest It is just that you sounded so much and I mean so much like sombody that used to come here and make trouble and he would change his name all the time, a kind of like a wolf in sheeps clothing. When you start seeing this a lot you kind of see fangs out of a lot of sheep, Ha Ha. Could you tell us about yourself so we can get to know you. Bruce Heinrich BH | ||
| Bruce H |
GlenD ----An ex-Adventist who believes in essentially nothing-------- Adevntism does that to a lot of people, could it be that maybe, maybe that is its purpose?? | ||
| Glen D. |
Bruce H Yes, I think you're right. The ability of Puritanism, and it's Adventist form, to empty Christianity of meaning and content appears to be an important step in finishing off God. The materialistic fanaticism of EGW in medicalizing spirituality is its most obvious form. If we stand in the transitional zone--is Adventism the appropriate adaptation of the uncertain to a harsh reality, or the compromise that ends spiritual possibilities for too many? | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Glen D, Yep, you DO have some great statements! You said: "The ability of Puritanism, and it's Adventist form, to empty Christianity of meaning and content appears to be an important step in finishing off God." Great insight. Got any more? Maryann | ||
| Glen D. |
Maryann Well, I don't know about insights, but I did just wonder if anyone knows if EGW in vision was impressive if she was alone with a person, or did it take the group effect to awe people? You know the picture, radiant, blissful young woman in rapture--but I think that's how she was described by believers as well. One of the less favorable reports is from a woman who had her head in her lap, though. As I recall the report (I think that Adventist Archives site has it), EGW seemed more odd and disturbed to her. But that could be an isolated view, too. Obviously I'm not concerned about Ellen's truth or falsity here, just the effect that she had on people, whether it was primarily a group effect when she seemed wondrous. The last question for me is why people ever believed her--before she became the mark of the sect, and then after. The after seems an easy case of group dynamics. I'm sure the before was also group dynamics, but not as easy, and I'm curious as to how much of it was, shall we say, Dionysiac. Would anyone know if music was typically involved before and after a vision? Thanks for any thoughts on it. Glen Davidson | ||
| Colleentinker |
Glen Davidsonóyour name sounds so familiar to me, but I can't remember if or where I knew you. Maybe I have the wrong Davidson! Do (did) I know you somewhere? I really don't know Ellen's effect on crowds vs. those in private. Have you ever heard of the Damian trial, by the way? James and Ellen were definitely part of that racous affair. The neighbors called the police because of the noise. James was in the bedroom with someone other than Ellen, Ellen was prostrate with people calling her the Imiiation of Christ, etc. I'm convinced that Ellen gained her credibility because James saw a means to build a following for his ideas. One account I've read described Ellen (early in her career) having a vision beforfe a handful of people. James talked to her throughout the vision, asking her if she saw or heard various things, to which she answered in the affirmative. When James was done suggesting "content" to Ellen and eliciting her responses, he brought her out of her trance. But no "prophet" could have achieved such status for so long without eventually committing oneself to the business. I believe that Ellen embraced the power and status she received from being God's "messenger". She eventually had dreams (after the visions stopped about midlife), and in her dreams she nearly always had a certain handsome young man who served as her guide. I'm quite convinced that she ended up having a "familiar spirit", to quote the Bible term, who guided her through her dreams. | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Colleen and Glen, I just figured out why the name Glen Davidson put a song in my heart. Remember back more years than one wants to admit to? Glen Campbell and John Davidson. I really enjoyed them. Maryann | ||
| Glen D. |
Maryann & Colleen Thanks. I couldn't really think where we might have met, Colleen. I graduated from Maplewood Academy in 1980, and finally graduated from Walla Walla College in 1997--the latter was admirably free of EGW, and really non-hostile to the highly unbelieving. They've tried to crack down since, as you probably know. With what effects? No idea. Yes I've read (well, skimmed) the Dammon trial--a fine supplement to what I've know of EGW. The James suggestion story is telling, and in agreement with what else is known of James. Yes, I expect that she fully knew what she was doing at later times as much as most people do at least, not necessarily a great deal. What I've thought about EGW of late is that, due at least in part to her brain damage, she was especially visual in her thought processes. She claimed to not understand what she'd heard until she saw it in vision. The physicist Feynman tells of how he thought things out without full understanding by conjuring up iconographic figures and having them interact. Well, Ellen was probably smart enough, but no genius, yet she got by through lapsing from the Puritan thought processes she'd been given into "visions"--sometimes involuntarily, but reports make it out that she seemed able to have some control in coming into and going out of "visions". Anyway, it seems that it would agree with her feelings that she got rather ordinary knowledge supernaturally--that she initiated nothing (her claim--I thought an odd one for God's messenger), yet got visions that were oddly in conformity with the prevailing opinion. Anyhow, that's how it seems to me, for she seemed incapable until her visions, which gave her confidence. And of course once others believed it as well, she was greatly encouraged. On her side it seems a plausible beginning. But likely this has all been said before, more or less. Glen Campbell and John Davidson, hmm. I know the name of Campbell, certainly, but if I had been interested at that time, I wouldn't have had permission to hear him. I don't know the John Davidson name at all as a singer. However, on the Pantera Sucks site my argument was against the Pantera haters--but I like some classical too, and don't really dislike much. Perhaps I missed something in not hearing the two. Take care. | ||
| Max |
Glen D., I like your assessment of EGW's condition. | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Glen D, You know, from what I have heard, the big name "faith healers" of today are putting on a great show too. They work their audiences into a frenzy and do all their fantastic healing etc and words/visions from god and so on. They appear to be "well on their way" in communion with god or half tranced. Then they take a quick peek at their watch to see if it's time to un-commune or un-trance themselves! It seems that EGW was sort of doing the same thing. I guess the saying of "there is nothing new under the sun" is pretty true? You really do have some dynamite comments and observations! ;-)) Maryann | ||
| Question |
Much work could be done uncovering the truth about EGW's mercury poisoning. Many of her "symptoms" could be mercury and not other things. It would be a easy matter to prove if we could just exhume the body and test the remains. Much could be learned. We could learn much about her diet and mental health. We would know everything she was eating the last 3 to 6 months she lived. That would be interesting to prove her last days diet. I would wager any amount I have that she was under control of mercury poisoning. The paramount symptom being delusions of grandeur (being closer to God that everyone else). | ||
| Colleentinker |
Whatever the case with Ellen, she was not a prophet of God. And whatever the truth about the origins of her visions, they did not come from God. The fact that the church was built on her "visions" and confirmations of other people's doctrinal inventions means the church was built on deception. Deception comes from only one place. We may try to wiggle out of saying Ellen was actually a "false prophet" by saying she was brain damaged, poisoned, or hysterical. But the truth is that greedy men used her, she benefited from their use, and Adventism is the result. Satan, the author of deception, has a claim on this organization. Colleen | ||
| Bethany |
You said it Colleen---AMEN! | ||
| Glen D. |
Hi Everyone, Thanks for the comments. One thing that strikes me in these exchanges is that there are two dangers for those recovering from EGW. One is that one's anger at being lied to isn't expressed and acknowledged. The other danger happens if EGW isn't eventually understood within her own development, needs, will to power, the whole experience of humanity. In the end, when she is understood, she can at last be forgotten except as a curiosity, a bit of weird Americana. It seems a good way to look at her. | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Glen D, I think what Colleen posted above about EGW's whole thingy being based in deception and being used by "other than GOD" has a ton of merit. This is the spiritual or un-spiritual side of EWG. I think that what you posted is execptionally profound. We DO need to understand the human side of EGW to put her to rest in peace, OUR peace. Would she have been used in the way she was if she didn't have the health issues she had? I personally don't think so! There would have been another pawn to be used in her place. It even appears that her husband used her health issues to further his own agenda! We have enough info without having to "dig her up" to know that there were health issues. How can I blame her personally for the legalistic way I was raised if I fully understand she was SICK? Sure, I still resent the 20+ years that I have been away from the Lord! I need to get over it! Grrrrrr! I just understand now that there was a driving force behind her (including her husband) that she most likely didn't initiate. Thank you for your comments;-) Maryann | ||
| Glen D. |
Yes, Maryann, I like how you say it. And it's easy for those of us who fear that we've become a bit too relativistic and nihilistic to forget how really wrong it was for a bunch of guys wanting power to elevate Ellen White to prophet status, as well as how wrong it was for her. Her sickness must be as crucial as you say. I think it, as well as her wretched husband, pushed her into that vengeful attitude that was her primary "literary production" early on. Do you think, whatever the losses, there is still some value in having a system to react against? I've toyed with the idea--it perhaps allows a certain freedom in the search for something else. The down side is that I think a lot of us were sadly groundless for years during a period of uncertainty. But the value of the freedom was not trivial then either(: | ||
| Colleentinker |
I don't see our situation as FAF'ers being one of having the "advantage" of having something to react against. I think life has simply placed us in a position in which we have a background to overcome. Children who grow up in abusive families have a damaging background to overcome. We as former Aventists have a background of deception andólet's call it what it isóevil to overcome. We can intellectualize it in many different waysóand I have done that in various ways in past years. The bottom line is that there is TRUTH and there is ERROR. When God begins to unveil the truth to us, we must embrace it and walk toward it. We also must proclaim that truth. Did people, principalities, and powers use Ellen's physical condition for their own gain? Of course. Did her physical condition in any way mitigate her willing participation in perpetuating a fraud? Of course not. She is not something/someone we can benignly write off as a product of her milieu. Martin Luther was also a product of his milieu, and he chose to say Yes to truth. Ellen chose to say No. Does Ellen's willful deception justify our continuing anger? No. If God does not heal our (justifiable) anger, we're still controlled by our past. The beauty of salvation is that God does heal our anger. He gives us a new reality in which He becomes the center. Praise God for truth and wholeness! | ||
| Max |
Thanks, Colleen, I agree 100%. I've recently thought that ONLY former Adventists can truly "take apart" Adventism. Think of it as a "fake house," such as the ones you see on a Hollywood movie set. Onscreen in the movie it looks real. Nobody can tell the difference. People who have never been Adventist can "see the movie" and think the house is real. Only those who have been inside the real thing -- as actors, stage hands, tech-support, camera-techs, grips, make-up people, etc., truly KNOW the house is ersatz, because they have been inside it in the course of their work making a movie. We in FAF are those "people who KNOW from the inside." Most former Adventists prefer not "to tattle" to the outside world. We have chosen to speak out. And we are not only speaking out, we are taking the bogus house apart piece by piece by piece. Because, my friends, the movie is made and the show is over! Still not under law, Max | ||
| Max |
Dear Posters and "Just Readers" alike, I feel obligated to explain my post above. I need to make clear that I want to do more than just dismantle the SDA ìhouse of false godsî ñ which are: * EGW, * KJV, * GC = ìhighest voice of God on earth,î * (Pseudoflesh + fat + sugar) diet ñ exercise = healthy or ìEdenicî lifestyle, * Pan-pseudotheon-in-time = required "Sabbath rest," * Jewelry/makeup abstinence, * Ersatz "Conflict of the Ages": Jesus=Angel vs. Lucifer=Angel, * Dinner winelessness, * The tithes 'n' offerings tax, * Etc. Yes, this house of false gods does need to come down, for it is dysfunctionalizing and destroying way too many lives. But that is only Phase One. Phase Two needs to be implemented. To understand Phase Two, you need to ìread ëní heedî Jesusí parable of the empty house. First the metaphor needs to be changed slightly ñ from deconstructing the house to vacating it. ìClick-click,î goes the mouse, and -- presto! -- the image on your high-definition screen is changed. Now read the parable (Matthew 12:4345 NIV). Jesus is speaking to ìthe Pharisees and teachers of the lawî: ^^ ìWhen an evil spirit comes out of a man, it goes through arid places seeking rest and does not find it. Then it says, ëI will return to the house I left.' When it arrives, it finds the house unoccupied, swept clean and put in order. Then it goes and takes with it seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there. And the final condition of that man is worse than the first. That is how it will be with this wicked generation.î ^^ Moral of the story: You cannot do the will of God by only driving out evil. Or by trying to overcome evil with greater evil. You must also replace evil -- or, in Jesus' words, "overcome evil" -- with good. And not just any good will do: Naked "divine good alone" will work. Application: You may be able take ìthe evilî out of the house (via exposure, for instance, as in the Rwanda and G.C. "Prexy Bob" Falkenberg fiascoes). But you canít take the house out of ìthe evil.î UNLESS ìthe goodî enters and occupies it. What is "the good"? None other than the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ! What is Phase Two? This: To preach, teach, illustrate, live and advance the unadulterated gospel to Adventists, former Adventists, and everyone with a legalistic bent of mind who denies the full and complete divinity of Christ. Simple, huh? Just the same, so that there will be no ìnail in the doorî mistake upon which to hang your raincoat, permit me to summarize. MY VISION OF A TWO-FOLD PURPOSE FOR FAF VIS-¿-VIS THE SDA DENOMINATION: PHASE ONE: Expose the false doctrines: (1) first and foremost the SDA fundamental-level denial of the full divinity of Jesus Christ -- and with that (2) the broken-and-still-incomplete atonement that guts the gospel and leaves people empty and starving. PHASE TWO: Restore the intact gospel message that was: 1. Fatally wounded by William Miller, Ellen and James White, Hiram Edson and other SDA pioneers, and: 2. Spread like the AIDS virus by official and unofficial Adventdom ever since. So help me God! Still not under law, Max | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Max, I'm reading with interest and will continue to read up-coming post's with interest. Maryann | ||
| Susan |
Max, wow what motivation! You've fired up my enthusiasm once again. I think one of the common passions we FAFers share is our desire to spread the word. Like you've said, we must spread the word about SDA heresy and share the "True" gospel with SDA's and unbelieving formers. There is a hunger there. Anyone who is not part of the body of Christ has that hunger. I think people in cults and former cult members also have so much spiritual abuse to get over as well. These folks have a warped view about God and the gospel. Also there's much confusion and skeptisism when people leave abusive churches. But remember how awesome it was/is to learn about the nature of Jesus. I'm learning everyday and it really blows me away. But, I'm also understanding that the wisdom of God and His mysteries are clearer, once you're a believer and once you are growing in the word. Let's hope and pray that our love for Christ and His Truth, will draw these deceived folks to the only one that can save. Thank you Max for touching my heart with your love and devotion to Jesus Christ! Susan | ||
| Question |
Good lecture Max! If we as learned members leave the Church one by one, how will the Church learn anything because someone will take our pew while it is still warm. We are replaced as soon as we leave. I say STAY!!! Start out with a quiet voice until there are many voices, then work to change things. Instead of FAF we should be TCA (True Christian Adventists). We were once Seventh-day Adventists but we should be Seven-day Adventists! How can we take the cult out of Adventism if the only leaders in the Church are the ones that let it become and stay a cult in the first place? I say stay and take back what is ours! | ||
| Maryann |
Way back in the dark ages of paganism when the big thing was offering this animal and that human to some god for some fantastic sick ritual, the Christians and converted Christians got together with a plan. The plan was to offer thanksgiving, praise and honor to Jesus Christ on the same day as the biggest pagan holidays. To make this plan work, the Christians planned very festive and appealing services, not in the pagan temples, but in a place away from the temples. The plan worked very well. This is why we now have Easter and Christmas. Had the converted Christians attempted to remain in the pagan temple and conduct their services or tried to convert the pagans in their own temple, what do you suppose would have happened? The big C and that my friend is COMPROMISE. I would chance a guess at what the cry of the Christian was; COME OUT OF HER MY PEOPLE! Just my nickels worth. Maryann | ||
| Max |
Hear, hear, Maryann! | ||
| Colleentinker |
Amen, Maryann! | ||
| Debbie S |
If anyone is interested in helping to spread the word on the truth about Adventism on another website, I sure could use the help. The website address is: http://www.books.dreambook.com/larryi/sdasurvey.html Thanks and God Bless Debbie | ||
| Question |
Maryann: If you feel like rowing your life boat away from the sinking ship while other souls are looking for firm footing on a deck that is slipping beneath the waves, you will live with that decision. I choose to do as the men in the band did, play on and help as many as I can into the life boats while there is still time. We all have friends and loved ones in the SDA Church and I want them to learn the truth while there is still time. | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Question, Wasn't there a ship that sank with all it's row boats still attached? Isn't the whole idea of the row boats to go to the sinking ship and row more victims away from the STINKING SHIP? Then go back for another load and repeat if needed? Are the row boats supposed to stay on the deck? Those row boats that are still on the ship need to manned to "row the boats ashore"? Not to be playing in a band, "Micheal rowed the boat ashore, hallelujah". BTW, just who is Ralph? I don't think he ever posted here before? Maryann | ||
| Question |
Ralph is the name of a old friend that never comes around any more. Sometimes memories of old friends are better that the reality. Michael does row a great ship! I agree that followers should get away from any cult movement. However, people with leadership abilities that have found out the truth about Adventism, should stay and become the REAL preacher in the tribe of faithful. Inside every SDA Church is a cell of people that will acept the TRUTH. | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Question, Who do you say Michael is? In the context of what you said: "Michael does row a great ship!" Curious........Maryann | ||
| Bruce H |
Question who would you listen to and trust more. A Clu Clux Clan member that loves Jews but stays in the Clan organization, or a clan member that has come out of the organization and points out its hatred. If you remaine in the Clan does this not limit your ability to tell the truth and if the clan did catch you loving Jews would they not kick you out. If you remain an Adventist, Then maybe you are watering down the Gospel and the truth in order to not get kick out, or maybe your are in stealth like a wolf and you are there to devour there children. Bring respect to your self and to the Gospel. Bruce Heinrich BH BH | ||
| Glen D. |
Interesting discussion: For what it's worth, I gave up essentially the belief in truth during the oscillations after losing SDAism and God as well. As Nietzsche observed of those who hung onto metaphysics and the meanings in logos, we haven't got rid of God for we still believe in grammar. What was left? A bunch of people believing in collections of religious and secular things, very little of which did I (or do I) believe except as conventional "truths" which could as easily be "lies". In that case, why especially fault the Adventists? They seemed a bit colder and sadder than many others, but a number of them were (and are) mine. I never quite stayed or left, though I'm pretty much drifted away. I liked a lot of them--who would say I shouldn't? Of course I'm not where most of you are, but Paul was one to accomodate the Puritans of his church--isn't their wall high enough? Of course he was at times fairly intolerant of them, too, but one sees him tolerating a couple of Adventist traits, puritanism in food and in the keeping of days. Weren't they legalists, like Adventism is when honest about itself? To the extent possible I don't like abandoning people. I don't know what that means in your cases, yet I like what Question (I hope you know that it's obvious who you are, Question) and Max say about trying to minimize the Adventist wall by keeping it porous. Surely it must be best for some to simply get away, though. Take from this what you wish, if anything. | ||
| Question |
I never go to the SDA Church because of work conflicts among other things, but I do call myself an Adventist because the brands go clear to the bone and I am marked for life. And when I call myself an Adventist, I can work with people inside the Church as one of them (because I am). I work with many people every week through my web outreach (the SDA-EGW Historical Society). | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Question, You didn't answer the question: "Who do you say Michael is? In the context of what you said: "'Michael does row a great ship!'" I really want to know.......Maryann | ||
| Max |
God's in charge, folks! It behooves us never to question a person's heart. We have absolutely no right to tell another person what to do -- whether to stay within or to leave Adventism. Why would we want to challenge God's leading ability? Recently a friend of mine was getting flack from other friends of his for continuing to attend SDA Sabbath services with his young kids. His wife was taking them, and his choice was to go along or not. "What kind of message are you sending?" they asked him. That ate on his heart. It was a terrible thing for them to do to their supposed friend. They were behaving like Job's supposed friends, indulging in that favorite human sport: "Blame the Victim!" When he asked me what I thought, I told him that the message he was sending to me was: here's a man who cares more about his little children than about what some mega-hypocrites might think. He said, "Whew, that's a great burden lifted from my shoulders!" My message to all of you good fellow-posters: Let God be God! Might as well, he's going to be God no matter what you do anyway. Soooo, let God be God! You are a loser if you don't. Blessings to all, Max | ||
| Colleentinker |
Glen D, I apapreciate your position. I certainly understand your leaving the church and most of what you know about God simultaneously. Just a thought: there's really absolutely no way to know whether or not God is real apart from risk. He certainly can't be proven intellectually or logically, and feelings don't prove him either. I believe that if you ever seriously wanted to know whether or not he was real or personal, you could conduct an experiment. You could ask him to let you know in some way that was meaningful to you whether or not he cared for you. You would have to be willing, though, to approach the experiment with a willingness to suspend, honestly, your disbelief and to instead have an open curiosity to recognize whether or not you got an answer. Just a thought. Colleen | ||
| Glen D. |
Hi all, It's easier to think one might go to an SDA church than to do it, Question, I agree. I like the more toned-down EGW-SDA site. Quite so, Max. At worst, faith should be able to transcend what one objects to in Adventism, if faith and human relations count for anything. Colleen, there are village atheists with animosity and defenses, and there are the others. The epistemological problems ambush God for a good many philosophers. The same problems undercut much that is closer and more "certain", making intermediate arguments and steps unavailable to support God. Furthermore, I've been through the step of acceding to the God concept. I decided that atheism was boring and unproductive, and I'd just believe in God whether there was one or not. Let beauty and the vaguely mystic float above the evidence or lack thereof. So I went with it, but what was the use? I'm Nietzschean not because I disbelieve in God per se, rather, belief did not live, was not a live option for me. After a couple of years I said, well, atheism is still boring, and in itself an unproductive negativity, yet God wasn't here for me. If God is in heaven, good for Him, but I'm here in a Romantic sensory experience (well, from time to time) and it doesn't converge into God. It is the flux that God may know, but that doesn't let me know God. Logically I can't make the jump to God and logos (some of us are too hard logically to use it in what seems such an illogical manner), subjectively experience doesn't rationalize, thus doesn't hit any hoped-for (or not) source. I'm the type to argue the plausibility of religion in philosophy class, at least compared with other beliefs--metaphysics, logos, ideology, and all the other unpardonable substitutes for God. If I had beliefs that were counter to God that would be one thing. Mostly I don't, except contingently (logic isn't a belief, it's an unavoidable human thought process, which I nonetheless consider fairly contingent and more fluid than it's usually treated). Psychologically the concept of God has not been an honest one for me, except briefly. Often I strike people as religious, though, for I consider religion equally plausible to most other beliefs that are held out to us as "truth"--I'm not properly reactive as unbelievers "should" be. It can reassure believers, or make them nervous, since it doesn't agree with the given oppositions. Even so, as I told someone the year before last at a secular school I attended, I'm so godless that I don't hate the Christians. This is unlike a number of Christians I've met. | ||
| Question |
I used your word Michael from your post to me. Michael is also used as a name for Christ in some circles. | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Question, I said: "Michael rowed the boat ashore, hallelujah". You said: "Michael does row a great ship!" Is Michael a name you use in your circle for Christ? I'm wondering if you used the term "Great Ship" for a particular reason. That old popular song I used, refered to a little rowboat. Maryann | ||
| Max |
Hi Glen D., Do you presuppose to find theism or agnosticism or atheism through inductive logic? If so, I do not believe you will ever arrive at any conclusion though you should outlive the universe. "Oh, taste and see [experience] that the Lord is good." Alive in grace, Max | ||
| Glen D. |
Thanks, Max, But did I really seem to say that? If so, my post, and story of how I once attempted to believe without reference to logic, surely failed. Wishing you and grace well, Glen | ||
| Colleen Tinker (Colleentinker) |
Glen D., Do you ever wish you believed (or could believe)? Actually, I'm certain your stumbling onto this website is significant. Here you will at least find people who will care about your questions and will pray for you. Glad you're here and praying for you (and us all), Colleen | ||
| Max |
Dear Glen D., To be truthful, no, I didn't understand your post. I do know, though, that the Western scientific mindset likes to start from a "convince me" outset. I do also believe that no one can find God by ANY means at all all on his own. Only by the magnetic power of the Holy Spirit drawing one to Christ, can we find him. Otherwise he finds us. I'm praying for you, brother, Max | ||
| Glen D. |
Colleen and Max, Well, I don't really find myself wanting to believe. I seem always to have not wanted to close off possibilities, but one has trouble knowing why. Death, of course, but there are other reasons, good and bad. It's harder to ever be caught out when one doesn't actually disbelieve (not a good reason), yet it also refuses to deny what could be true--a good reason I think. Then there's the nihilistic tendency which hangs onto possibility through negating its meaning, again, not good. Yet even it could allow one to negate all of the forms that mis-lead one from God, leaving that which is, God (assuming He exists). Good point about the Western approach. Even deep skepticism about the world, the senses, and everything, seems to come from that approach in the West. However, some of us are more stuck in the paradoxes of Zeno and quantum mechanics, the difficulty in pinning down logic and identity, and all of the little interstices and puns of the world. There's the risk of getting stuck in non-logic as well though. I think that something like deconstruction is a trap in the questions of language. It could be that I'm in a trap like this, as little as I like the nihilism of, well, the present. Certainly I can see no reason to fault or question the "magnetic pull of the Holy Spirit..." when one knows its reality. I always seemed to end up in the differentials of beauty myself. It could be lostness and wandering, but it intrigues me. Thanks for the concern, Glen | ||
| Max |
Dear Glen, It seems as though our sovereign God wants you to be exactly where you are right now. Peace to you, Max | ||
| Colleen Tinker (Colleentinker) |
Glenn D, Max's statement is profound, actually. Speaking from experience: there comes a time when we have to just stop analyzing and face the (perhaps frightening) fact that reality is bigger than we can see. Not all reality is physicalóat least, not all is measurable by our three (or four)dimensional physics. Supporting you in prayer, Colleen | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Glen D, This site is collecting so much material that it is almost impossible to cover it all now. Because of that and the fact that there are a lot of on going discussions that go on and on and on and on, have you ever heard the 1 minute plan of salvation? If you have not, let me know and I'll give it a shot. Salvation has been such a "hazing ordeal" to so many. I'm sure you can relate to that!!! Sooo, do you want to hear the simple version? Maryann |
