| Author |
Message |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 294
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 10:41 am: |     |
I've had those same discussions...it is an endless argument. I welcome them to come see which "son" we truly are worshipping :-).
|
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 295
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 10:57 am: | |
This morning, I was listening to a cd by mercyme and the song "spoken for" was playing. B had bought the cd and I was struck as I listened to it wondering HOW they can see consistency in their "view" of us and still find any spiritual value or worth in "our" music. It seems at some juncture in life, if you're even thinking at all, you would have to deal with this jumble of inconsistencies. For B, he buries his head in the sand deeper than any I've ever met. He used to tell me how much he liked working with kids, and I realized it was because they took what he said as truth and really didn't question him, and it was easier for him that way. I keep praying that the Holy Spirit will irritate him until he is forced to deal with some of these issues. And though part of me still wishes things could be different, part of me is pragmatic in regards to what these conflicts will mean to our son. I chase the rabbit around every bush I can find, but it always leads back to the same spot...Adventism is right and anything that contradicts it is wrong, no matter how "spiritual" it seems on the surface.
That is quite a set of blinders. I wonder if God saw the children of Israel in similar fashion. |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 200
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 11:12 am: | |
Lydell, yes, I believe Focus on the Family does see Adventism as generally "orthodox" with a difference of a day. I understood this postiion as little better when I heard Dobson himself say that he grew up Nazarene. The Nazarenes are actually quite stiffly legalistc and rigid, and they do actively promote the law.
Of course, the Nazarenes are not founded on a false prophet, so there is a significant basic difference.
I continue to feel frustrated by the perception (at least in areas like So. Cal where Adventism is greatly whitewashed) that Adventism is truly part of the greater Christian community, and we shouldn't divide over a day. The true meanings of Adventist beliefs just aren't seen until you get sucked into it quite a way.
In this respect Adventism is much like Mormonism. Mormons say they love Jesus, believe in Him; he died to save them; he's the Savior of the world. They have all the right words. It's only when you get more deeply inside that you begin to discover the oddities of their doctrines. They also say that God can contradict himself if his words at different times are needed for people's edification in different ways. They call if "progressive revelation." Sound familiar?
Colleen |
Pheeki
Registered user
Username: Pheeki
Post Number: 302
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 12:37 pm: | |
Recent conversation with my husband.
We were listening to a song by Chris Rice and at the end it says (paraphrasing) "when you draw your last breath...fly to Jesus." My husband was wanting to perform this song the next morning at the SDA church. I said..."Don't you think they might not like the message of this song because they believe in soul sleep?"
He said, "It wouldn't bother them...the next thing they know will be the resurrection and flying up to Jesus."
I said, "Jesus said that those who believe in Him will never die." Well, this set him off. He started yelling at me. I said, "Why does that make you so mad?" He said it was my know it all tone. I try so hard not to have any tones in my voice when I speak of my beliefs but no matter how I approach it it is still received with anger and I think Melissa hit the nail on the head in her post!!! Very insightful.
There are 3 issues that set the SDA's off faster than anything and I believe I can rank them for you...
#1 The state of the dead...it is of paramount importance that the dead know nothing...this will start an arguement quicker than anything.
#2 That Saturday is the only day approved for worship.
#3 Love for Catholics. (I was told, "I cannot believe you would even think about attending church with them...they have a man who says he is God's mouthpiece on earth"...which reminds me of the idolotrous relationship SDA's share with Ellen.) I could worship with them as easily as with SDA's!
#4 Saying Ellen White is not a prophet. (this sets the conservatives off anyway...not so much the liberals.)
My husband told me his relative said this to him..."In my heart I am a republican but I will probably vote democrat because republicans are more likely to be Christians and pass the Sunday laws."
I have several problems with this statement.
#1-God is in control...if he wanted Sunday laws to be passed no one on this earth could stop it.
#2-Why stop it? Why be afraid and try to prolong it? Bring it on!
#3-Not to step on toes here...but Democrats are usually pro-choice...I cannot see how anyone could support this. But people rationalize it away because democrats are big supporters of Church and state separation...and we know SDA's are big time into religious liberty...therefore a lot of SDA vote democrat. I am generalizing but I have found this to be true.
#4- I think his statement lacks faith in God. We have no fear if we trust in him...why should we fear for the future...we know we have a heavenly future...Paul said it best..."to be absent from the body is to gain!!!!" Can I get an amen????!!!!
***Disclaimer...I don't believe in Ellen's end time scenario...I don't believe there will ever be Sunday laws...if there were...I wouldn't have a problem because it isn't about a day.
The Children of Isreal were not reconciled...they had to meet with God at special times, in special places and with sacrifices. Now that we are reconciled we don't have to go anywhere to meet with God and we have full access to him 24x7...thankyou Jesus. |
Leigh
Registered user
Username: Leigh
Post Number: 80
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 2:15 pm: | |
pheeki, when I was in 7th grade, during the election when Carter and Ford were running, the discussion of Carter maybe passing a Sunday law because of his Christian background came up in school. One of the boys asked the the teacher, "If he might be the one to pass the sunday laws, why not vote for him? Don't we want Jesus to come sooner?" (I can't remember what the teacher said) Weren't some sda's afraid that JFK and would do that also, since he was Catholic? and these were 2 Democrats. |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 202
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 2:44 pm: | |
Leigh, you're right; it's completely turned around. I've noticed that, too. When I was growing up, "democrat" was almost a dirty word. Odd how these things shift, isn't it?!
Colleen |
Chris
Registered user
Username: Chris
Post Number: 299
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 - 5:06 pm: | |
When I attended PMC I heard Dwight Nelson (of Net 200X fame) preach a sermon that dealt with the question of SDA politics. He cited a study showing that a mjority of Adventists our socially and economically conservative in their thinking and beliefs, but a majority of SDAs vote for liberal politicians. As I remember it, he didn't cite this as a bad thing, but rather a virtuous way of defending religous liberty in America. I remember thinking even way back then that it seemed wrong for Adventist to vote for people who were opposed to all things Christian in the hopes of delaying the end. I could understand it becasue I too was scared of the tribulation, but I believed it must happen and couldn't get behind voting for anyone that was directly opposed to everything else I believed in as a Christian.
Chris |
Chris
Registered user
Username: Chris
Post Number: 301
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 - 7:16 am: | |
In response to the post above about evagelicals thinking Adventism is just another Christian denomination, I have to tell you about the latest infuriating thing Hank Hannegraff said on Bible Answer Man.
On the Tues. 4/27 broadcast a young woman in her twenties called the show and said that she had been a devout SDA her entire life, but recently went with her boyfirend to a Christian bookstore to try to find material on Adventism so she could see how it compared to other denominations. The clerk at the store told her they didn't carry much SDA stuff because many people considered it to be "cultish". She called Hank in fear that she may have spent her life in a cult and may not be saved. Hank reassured her that her salvation was based on faith in Christ alone (good), but then went on to explain that no one should paint the whole SDA church with a broad brush. He said that Adventism ranges from liberals who deny essential Christian doctrines, to evagelicals that major on the essentials, to traditionalist who major on abberant doctrines like soul sleep, sabbatariansim, and the seer status of EGW. His point seemed to be that we can't judge SDAs based on a few radical traditionalist.
Come on Hank! Adventist that are passionate about soul sleep, sabbatarianism, and EGW are not a minority, they are the representative group in the sect and they hold the power in the GC. There might be some evangelicals within Adventism, but they're pretty hard to find and pretty quite. Hank should have been giving this young lady literature to read. He should have been conseling her to run, not walk, out of the group. This kind of thing just infuriates me.
I know some Christians, including the late Walter Martin, think that accepting SDAs into the evangelical community is the kind and loving thing to do. IT IS NOT! This kind of misplaced acceptance only helps to hold many lay people in bondage instead of openning their eyes. It only serves to delay indefinately the repentance and reform that is so desperately needed in the organization. The best thing that evangelicals could do to help SDAs is take a firm stand on exactly what the Adventism is and what it is not.
Chris
|
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 296
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 - 8:22 am: | |
I listened to him for the first time in a long time on Monday and they teaser line was something about cults, so it seemed he was focusing on false teaching that day. The first caller asked about Joel Olsteen (who I have wondered about myself down there in Houston). I listened to him to go on and on about how Joel Olsteen is not to be listened to because he doesn't believe in a completed atonement on the cross and yet neither does adventism. So, why on that one thing is it okay to dismiss him as teaching against an essential doctrine but can't make blanket remarks about adventism? I was so hoping one of you with more personal experience than I would call and take him to task on some of his views.... |
Pheeki
Registered user
Username: Pheeki
Post Number: 304
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 - 9:04 am: | |
You guys need to email Hank. Seriously!!!! |
Chris
Registered user
Username: Chris
Post Number: 302
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 - 10:20 am: | |
You're right Melissa. The teaching of an incomplete atonement at the cross is a serious deviation from Christian soteriology. If we're going to hold a particular minister's feet to the fire on such an aberrant doctrine, than we should do so to organizations that teach the same thing as well.
There are two aspects to this problem as I see. The first is specific to the question of the atonement, the second is a statement about Hank and CRI's stance on Adventism in general.
1) Deception and the language barriar: When talking to outsiders, SDAs often equivicate, obscure, or outright deny their doctrine of an incomplete atonement. The original QOD helped to cover up the real SDA view of the atonement. Modern SDA will often try to say that the atonement was completed at the cross *but* Jesus's current work is the application of that atonement to individual believers. On the surface this doesn't sound all that bad. We all agree that no one receives the benefit of Christ's death until they believe and accept Christ as Lord. But this is not what SDAs really mean. There is ample evidence in the writings of EGW and other SDA pioneers that they believe the cross to only be the first phase of the atonement with the next phase to be completed within the Heavenly sancutuary beginning in 1844. The work of atonement now going on according to the SDA view is one of judging works and granting pardon to individual sins that have been confessed. No one can know when this work will be finished or if they will ultimately be found to be fit for Heaven. So obviously it wasn't finished at the cross no matter how SDA apologist try to reframe the language.
2) I don't think Hank H. has ever done much of his own primary research. Instead he has relied on the work of others (mainly his predecessor Dr. Martin) to get him through. Becasue of this he will not go any further than the position Dr. Martin took in the 1950's. I don't think any amount of letters or e-mails will probably change that.
Chris |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 206
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 - 12:55 pm: | |
We have tried emailing him, and I know people who have sent him much material to read. I've come to believe Hanegraaf has made some sort of "deal", although I don't know what. He came very close to doing a series on Adventism, and then it all just "went away". Clearly the church has gotten to him, and with their clever words, they have convinced him the mainstream of the church is not cultic.
I agree; I don't think he's going to change. We can pray for truth to be know, though!
Colleen |
Sabra
Registered user
Username: Sabra
Post Number: 82
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 - 6:12 pm: | |
Joel Osteen has Baptist roots and I don't even believe that unless I hear it from him. Baptists are very clear on the atonement.
I have found the same thing with lots of christians, they just don't see Adventism as a problem. I had a chiropractor work on me last week and she is a christian, even prayed for me while she was straightening me out. We talked a lot about everything and got off on Adventism somehow. She said she had lots of SDA friends and they are really Jesus followers.
I pointed out the grave errors, a few of them and she was shocked.
I don't listen to Hank, but he isn't alone in his opinion. My previous Baptist pastor didn't think they were that bad either. He said a lot of people didn't know about it, and they didn't want anyone to know, but they would send pastors from Collegedale to him to pray for them and for deliverance from certain areas they were dealing with and for counseling. He wasn't very specific but it was strange.
|
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2
Post Number: 520
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, April 29, 2004 - 2:26 pm: | |
I'll quickly share another true story from my life in dealing with my SDA loved ones. Here it is-Several months ago someone was going through my neighborhood at night and throwing cement blocks through car windows. First my cars back window got broke out. Then the following week my sons windshield got broke out and then the following week my windshield got totally smashed. Then I decided to walk to church one Wednedsay for Lenten Vespers and I asked if someone could give me a ride home. Someone at the church asked how come I had to walk and I told my sad story. Before I had time to blink the minister was next to me telling me to get on the phone and try to get the best deal I could for a new windshield and if I promised I'd park the car in my garage from now on the church would pay for the windshield. Sounded like a good deal to me so I called around. Finilly I got a real good offer and the glass company came out and put a nice new window in for me. My mother asked me how much the window cost. I told her the cost but then I added, "It really didn't cost me anything because it was a gift". I was going to leave it at that but of course she then asked who gave me such a gift. I told her the Lutheran church that I attend. She made a comment about if I'm not going to go to the right church anyway then I might as well attend one that will buy me stuff. It super hurt my feelings and I started crying and I began to leave. But, I stopped and told her the Lutherans are quite well known for their kindness and generosity and this is because they follow the commandment by Jesus to love one another very seriouselly. At first I thought, "Oh no, I used the wrong word (commandment)". But then I realized I didn't use the wrong word because that is the exact same word that Jeses used. She got a bit upset and said something about the SDA church never helping out even when they knew their faithful needs help and I mumbled something about different organizations having different priorities. At the time it was very emotionally tramatic for me. However, I think it was a good thing as my mom is not so hostile at my choice of churches now. She still knows I'm totally wrong but, well, what can I say, at least I'm with a church group that buys me things. And, during this she also made the comment that she was happy to know that they (the Lutherans) follow at least one commandment. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page