| Author | Message | ||
| Jerry (Jerry) |
In a discussion with liberal SDAís, they made a statement about how everything was ìpure and true to Christianityî until 1888 in the Adventist movement, then things went wrong in a doctrinal sense. That makes no sense to me as a historical/doctrinal statement. Can someone suggest what that means from the perspective of a liberal Adventist? That is, what changed or happened in that year that they might see as pivotal? Of course, I disagree that no errors were made before that time. I am trying to understand their perspective. | ||
| Pheeki (Pheeki) |
http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/history/About.htm This is lengthy reading but it is a history of Christianity and appears to be quite informative. I have no idea what they are talking about except that is perhaps when (trying to remember..but) the farmer(?) had the vision in the wheatfield that they hadn't been wrong about the date but it occurred in heaven as the beginning of the investigative judgment(all to explain why Christ's return had not occurred, though Wm. Miller was shown by many different pastors, clergy-the texts in the Bible that said "no man shall know"...so was he setting himself up as God? He persisted in his claim in the face of plain scripture...that is what the SDA are founded on!) ...In my opinion that is where it all went wrong!!! | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
I really don't know exactly, Jerry. 1888 was the year that Jones and Wagnonner presented their famous righteousness by faith lectures. There was a great reaction against them, including statements against them by EGW. They were marginalized after their presentation. Eventually EGW exonerated their message, but the whole Jones & Wanggoner, 1888 event has remained in Adventist memory as an unfortunate experienceónow mostly because it was rejected at first. Today there is a great resurgence of interest in the "1888 Message", as it's called. Even though it's preached as righteousness by faith, though, it is uniquely Adventist. It insists that we are saved by faith (so far so good), but that the result of this salvation is that Jesus now keeps the law in me through the power of the Holy Spirit in us. It's still righteousness by perfect law-keeping. Instead of the New Covenant in which the law has no more authority over me and I live under the authority of the Holy Spirit, the 1888 Message clearly teaches the law still has authority. It's just that now our bodies will keep the law because the Holy Spirit does it in (or through) us. It's really confusing and crazy-making. What liberals mean by the church going wrong in a doctrinal sense, I don't know. I can understand "evangelical Adventists" might say that, but liberals...? (Liberal Adventists usually don't hold very tightly to any doctrinal position; many even question the divinity of Jesus.) Evangelical Adventists, on the other hand, believe that they have salvation right. They believe we are saved by faith, and many overlay the 1888 Message over their understanding. They don't really know how bound by Adventist chains they are. Their deep conviction regarding the Sabbath, however, tips their hand. They are truly Adventist; they'll find any way they can to try to "purify" SDA doctrines in order to make them more evangelical. That being said, I also want to say that there are Adventists who are really seeking truth, and many evangelical Adventists are on a slow trajectory out of the church; they might not know it yet, but they are committed to knowing Jesus and to growing as he brings truth to them. | ||
| Jerry (Jerry) |
I may have mislabeled this group as ìliberalî according to your definitions, Colleen. They certainly have strong doctrinal positions and seem more like what you would call ìevangelical Adventists.î If I understand your idea, the reference might mean something like this: They probably believe that the Jones and Waggoner event signaled the change from a ìBerean, Protestant, Sola Scripturaî core to a more radical legalistic oppressive leadership. As you probably agree, I believe that this group misses the fact that the ìmarginalization î of the ì1888 messageî was pre-ordained by the doctrinal errors made before that time. Certainly, the flaws in that message by caveat (e.g. ìsola scriptura, . . . except . . .î and ìJustification by faith . . . however . . .î) should not be missed. If anyone else can expand or refine my understanding, I will be grateful. | ||
| Gatororeo7 (Gatororeo7) |
I'm not as knowledgable about the history of the SDA church outside its initial foundings, and I'm sure I dont have much to contribute, but your last statement hits it on the head. What was taught at its foundations set the stage for what they did in 1888 and what they are doing now. Remember, they believed that salvation was closed in 1844, and suddenly was opened in 1851. This event seemed to begin their exclusiveness. They denied the deity of Christ, believed they had some "present truth", and a bunch of baloney like that. So then it would be no surprise to me that they would have rejected the true Gospel when it was presented. But to be "uniquely Adventist", they had to about-face, accept it, but on their terms, so not to alarm their "worldwide masses" as they saw it. And, as a result, they still preach the same message. "Sola scriptura, except EGW helps us understand it so much better... saved by grace, but better keep the Sabbath to be sure." | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
Yes, I think you've both said it right, Joel and Jerry. The foundational beliefs laid the groundwork for the church's rejection of righteousness by faith as an official teaching in 1888. Now, many Adventists bemoan the church's reaction to Jones and Waggoner. And, still ironically, the 1888 devotees preach "righteousness by faith" with a definite EGW overlay and a Ten Commandment (read that FOURTH commandment) requirement. It's all quite confusing and crazy-making. I used to play such mental gymnastics to try to make everything fit. I remember that the "brick wall" I used to repeatedly run into was the Sabbath requirement. I just couldn't see how the required observance of the seventh day would emerge as natural consequence of following the Holy Spirit, Sure, I could see how it might happen if one had been TAUGHT to keep it, but I could not figure out how a person who had never heard the SDA arguments would naturally begin keeping the seventh day when they were converted. Holy living, hot killing, stealing, bearing false witness, worshiping God only--those made sense. But KEEPING the seventh day was always my stumbling block when thinkinhg about being saved by grace alone through faith in Jesus alone. Praise God he's made it plain to me! It's HIM, not a day! Colleen | ||
| Pheeki (Pheeki) |
Please pray for my daughter. I feel a conspiracy afoot. She was baptized (as most SDA kids are, around 9-10 years old) but is now attending a baptismal class at the school. I think because she told the teachers I was confusing her so(like she ever had a clear handle on it to begin with!) they shoved her into a baptismal class when she is already baptised so she can spend time with the pastor. On top of that, she has been attending it for a week or two with out me knowing. My son who was also baptized in July (right before my blinders fell off) is attending it too. Don't you find that funny? It turns out that my husband already knew about it and didn't tell me. I found out from my 9 year old daughter who wanted to attend it and I told her I didn't think she was ready. What I really wanted to do was have more time to explain righteousness by faith to her before they indoctrinate her into R by F + the 10 Commandments. Of all my kids, she loves to hear me read scripture and seems to grasp it. I don't want her to be ruined! So, last night for worship, my husband was studying so it was just me and the kids...I read Galatians! (what a great book). On the way home from school yesterday I asked them what they had been learing in the baptismal class and my daughter said, "We have to keep the 10 Commandments." I tried to explain to her about the Law being comprised of 613 Laws and to keep them correctly you had to keep all of them. she got defensive and changed the subject. So, I got out Galatians last night and read to them about R by F and what the purpose of the Law is and my younger daughter really seemed to understand. My oldest daughter at the end said, "What are you reading that from?" I know she wanted to ask the pastor what he thought. (She doesn't seem to trust the Bible!) I knew she didn't trust me b/c of the way my husband has treated me, the things he has said. He has really undermined my authority as a parent, spiritual leader since I "came out" with my new beliefs. So please pray for us! But, he came downstairs when I was finishing chapter 3 of Galatians and it was talking about how we are now in Chirst and not under the Law...and he said, "thus the New Covenant." I said "right." I didn't detect any sarcasm in his voice, what a surprise! Maybe he is gaining understanding! It's a crumb but I'll take it! | ||
| Another_Carol (Another_Carol) |
Pheeki, I will pray and believe that God has the answer on the way. I will also lift you up to my Bible Study class tonight. We just finished with Galatians and are now studing Ephesians. We had the little chapter of Philemon in between. You are on my mind so much because of the like situation with my daughter. Why, I ask do they get the idea that it is right to be so deceptive? I know the answer but it just is so foreign to my way of thinking. Like I said in my post with the Bible translation if my integrity falls away I am lost. That is not to say that I don't make mistakes and when I do as I did with the translation issue God shows me how I should have done better and therin is the reason when you are in Christ things work because you are led by the spirit and not by some person or thing or whatever else besides the Lord and Saviour Jesus Chrsit, who left His spirit to be in us so that we would not have to have these dissensions and look what Galatians 5:19 says about these very things. In the Bible that I studied intensly for 6 months after this began in 1998 I had galatians from 3-5 post noted together because that's where it was at for me and then I realized that Romans, and Hebrews and 2 Corinthians and Ephesians and 1 John are all saying the same thing and it reads so beautifully, when I sart I can't put it down. God has given you a mission and He will guide you thru it. Why do I say that not even knowing you, it's because I've been there done it and will continue to do it until those that I love and any one else that cares to listen will know the height and breath of the Love of my Saviour and claim it for themselves. This I pray for your husband and family. Because there is none other than Jesus Christ, Carol | ||
| Pheeki (Pheeki) |
Thanks for your kind and timely words Carol. I really think my husband will come around. He has softened a lot towards me lately. (all those prayers are working.) I feel like all will work out. I really feel like emailing the pastor who is teaching my children and asking him not to pollute the Gospel by adding to it! However, it would get me no where so I am going to talk to my kids at home. Everyone but my oldest daughter is receptive to this...but I know some things sink in anyway to her...we'll see. This is totally unrelated but...I was on a Christian site that talks about all the accolades and acceptance that Ozzy Osbourne is recieving now and they wanted to remind the public what this man was/is...very Satanic. Isn't it sad how Satan used him up and made him a blithering fool, yet one that the world admires because of his great wealth. Ultimately that is all Satan can give is worldly posessions...if you are lucky enough to not be double crossed by him and end up dead or in jail, etc. Ozzy is not happy. He battles his addictions and he talks about the demons who won't leave him alone. ( I think he has been demon posessed for years...he says he has done things that he cannot explain, etc.) So I have decided to pray for Ozzy and his family. Isn't that a strange notion? I have had the impression that this is the thing I need to do. Does anyone else get impressions to pray for people you don't even know? | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
Yes, Pheeki, I have had those impressions. Two of the most notable for me are Dr. Laura Schlessinger and Clifford Goldstein, the Jew-turned-Adventist who is now the SDA religious liberty expert. I am praising God for the small but noticable progress in your husband's attitude toward you and the Bible. I will also pray for your children. I know so well how you feel, having people indoctrinating them against your will, and you're powerless to stop it. God has his hand over them, Pheeki, and he will guard them and continue to draw them to himself. I will continue to pray that you will know how to respect and love your husband when he is defensive, and that he will desire to know Jesus and be compelled by your witness. Colleen | ||
| Susan_2 (Susan_2) |
I have heard and read numerous times that there are 613 laws on the o.t. can I find a list of all 613 somewhere on the internet? I am courious what they all are. And Pheeki, I am glad to hear that your husband hasn't been so harsh with you lately, especially in front of the children. I think it's totally goofy for your daughter to bein that baptism class. The only reason for it is to indroctinate her even more. Be wary, be very wary of that class she is in. At her age she ust does not need to be filled with all the guilt producing garbage they are going to try to instill into her mind. Keep reading Galations to her and some of the other n.t. books, too, especially one and two Corinthins, ephansians, etc. At her age please stay away from revelation. Growing up sda I can tell you that from infancy up I was bombarded with the book of Revelation. It's a real scary book, as presented in the sda way. Stick with Galations. Add some Psalms, etc. | ||
| Doug222 (Doug222) |
Colleen, Do you care to elaborate on your concerns with Dr. Laura? I used to be an avid listener. I was sorry to hear about her mother. I have my own impressions, but would be interested to hear yours if you feel comfortable sharing. Thx. Doug | ||
| Pheeki (Pheeki) |
THIS IS THE LATEST MY FRIEND SENT ME...IT MAY EXPLAIN A LITTLE- SUSAN. ALSO, JUST READ THE BIBLE STARTING AFTER EXODUS ON UP TO DEUTERONOMY...THAT IS WHERE THE REST OF THE LAW IS WRITTEN AND IT IS QUITE DETAILED AS TO HOW THE ISREALITES SHOULD BEHAVE. IT IS INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT JEWS DO NOT SEPARATE THE 10 COMMANDMENTS FROM THE OTHER LAW THAT GOD SPOKE TO MOSES. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE HAVE DONE LATER (IT MAY HAVE STARTED IN THE REFORMATION?) ANYWAY, IT IS POLLUTING THE GOSPEL TO SAY THAT WE HAVE TO STILL KEEP THE LAWS GIVEN TO A HARD HEARTED PEOPLE. IF YOU ARE IN CHRIST YOU ARE A NEW CREATION WITH HIS SPIRIT INDWELLING AND ARE PARTAKERS OF THE NEW COVENANT- NOT WRITTEN ON STONE BUT ON THE FLESH OF OUR HEARTS. OUR HEARTS ARE MADE SOFT IN CHRIST, NOT HARD LIKE STONE! THOSE LAWS ARE FOR MURDERS, LIARS, THOSE NOT IN CHRIST. I THINK OF LOT'S WIFE...SHE LOOKED BACK TO SODOM (MISSING HER OLD LIFE) INSTEAD OF FORWARD TO HER SALVATION...PEOPLE WHO KEEP LOOKING BACK TO THE OLD (DARE WE SAY WORSHIPPING THE OLD) DON'T HAVE THEIR EYES FORWARD ON CHRIST. IT IS ONLY WHEN WE LOOK TO CHRIST THAT THE BLINDERS ARE REMOVED, IT PLAINLY SAYS THAT WHEN MOSES IS READ THAT THE PEOPLE HAVE A VEIL AND THEY CAN'T UNDERSTAND BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT TURNING TO CHRIST BUT THE OLD WAY, WHICH NEVER SAVED ANYONE... I KNOW I AM RAMBLING, BUT...HERE IS THE MESSIANIC GUY'S TAKE ON THE 613 LAWS. i FEEL SORRY FOR THEM...THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT CHRIST ACCOMPLISHED, THEY ARE STILL LOOKING TO THE LAW TO MAKE THEM READY. THEY DON'T REALIZE CHRIST DOES THIS...NOT US. IN FACT LET ME ALSO INCLUDE WHAT MY SDA PREACHER BROTHER SENT ME LAST NIGHT, WHICH MADE ME REALLY SAD. HE WRITES: There is only one of God's (Jesus') Commandments that requires faith. Nine are perfectly logical. It was the "Faith Test" in the Garden of Eden that set all that we see wrong in the world into motion. It will be a "Faith Test" at the end of time, as we know it, that brings it all to an end. ISN'T THAT SAD THAT THEY THINK THEY HAVE TO PASS A FAITH TEST. WHAT PRESSURE! INSTEAD OF RESTING IN CHRIST WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT A TEST AT THE END! I AM AN EDUCATOR, I FIND THAT WHEN I TEACH, THE FIRST THING THEY ASK ME IS IF THERE IS A TEST AT THE END. ONCE I ASSURE THEM THERE IS NOT (WE ARE ADULT LEARNERS) THERE IS A NOTED RELAXATION AND I FEEL THEY LEARN MORE NOT BEING UNDER THAT PRESSURE...PERHAPS I AM WRONG HERE BUT THIS STRIKES ME AS VERY WORKS ORIENTED. HAVING FAITH IN JESUS IS THE ONLY THING WE HAVE TO DO. EVEN OUR FAITH IS A GIFT FROM GOD AND DOESN'T COME FROM US! ISN'T WHAT HE IS SAYING PUTTING OUR SALVATION IN OUR OWN HANDS? ISN'T THAT MAKING US LIKE GOD? ISN'T THAT WHAT SATAN PROMISED? THAT WE WOULD BE LIKE GOD. OUR SALVATION DOES NOT REST ON PASSING THE SABBATH TEST! I FEEL SO SAD FOR HIM. HERE IS THE MESSIANIC POST. Greetings, Brother Norman. In your web site I noticed that you mentioned the 613 commandments. I would greatly appreciate having a more detailed description -- are there the 10 commandments, plus the commandments in Leviticus and in Deuteronomy? Anything more? I never counted them. Maranatha, Sister [name withheld] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shalom, sister. The short answer to your question is that the "613 Commandments" is a rabbinical list of all the commands given throughout the Torah, the first five books of Moshe (also called the Pentateuch.) I use the idea of "613" commandments to establish the idea that we as believers are not to follow only just the Ten Commandments, but that the whole of the Torah (the Bridal Instructions) still applies to us as believers. The idea of "613 Commandments" is actually a bit of well-intended rabbinical legalism. Someone went through and made a list of all the commandments, noting 613 separate "points of Law;" the idea being that if one obeys 613 separate "Laws" then one is blameless before the Throne. The only problem with that is that the Torah was never intended as a Law book. Rather, it was mainly a record of how YHWH/Yeshua instructed Israel's descendants to behave (at Mount Sinai) if we wanted to be His chosen people (His bride.) The idea of "613 points of Law" is a fallacy. Most of us can think of a number of people (including many of our so-called "shepherds") who obey all of the 613 "Laws," including wearing a beard, tzitziyot, observing Sabbath and the Feast days, using all the correct Names, and all that...but whose hearts are as hard as stone. Is that what He wants as a bride? The Instructions (Torah) were essentially YHWH's/Yeshua's engagement orders when we were first coming out of Egypt. He was saying, "If you really want to be My bride, then don't do like that...do like this!" He was sort of pointing us in the right direction so that we might begin to purify ourselves, in preparation for His return. The Torah can be taken as a Law book; but it is really far more than just a Law book. Basically it describes a right attitude, which can only be kept when one is filled with His Spirit. We go into a lot more detail in the book as to why the Law the apostles kept was not just the Ten Commandments, but the whole of the Law (Torah.) I pray that will answer your question. In His love, Norman | ||
| Susan_2 (Susan_2) |
You can go to www.biblesabbath.org and they have a lits of many differebt sabbath-keeping churches and a lot of those churches try their best to observe all the rules. They are all Christian churches. None Jewish or of any other bent. No Messianiac churches an no Jews for Jesus, etc. The one that really cracks me up is the one somewhere way out in the boonies of the deep south that makes its members always habve a blue fringe on the bottom of their clothes. They give an obscre text that says the true follower will be identified by having a blue fringe on the hem of their garments. Then they also practice rattler sake handling. Now, that is a realy scarry thing. But, on the other hand, there ae the ones with regular normal people like the Seventh-day Baptists and the Church of God Seventh-day, etc. I have cousins who have the book so when they travel they can be visitors at thse interesting and iunusual churches. They seem to have a great btime doing this. Well, whatever smokes your sorts, is what I awlways say. Many are extreme in an extreme Penticostal type of thing. There are 7th day Catholis, 7th day Lutherans, the whole gammet. | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
Doug, my take on Dr. Laura is that she seems dedicated to living consistently as a law-keeper. I used to listen to her before she became a Jew, and I must say she has become much more dogmatic and "black-and-white" in her handling of issues. Two of her oft-repeated beliefs with which I disagree are: 1) People cannot change their thoughts or motives; they can only change their behavior. What one THINKS is not important; what one DOES is what matters. 2) Do not forgive unrepentant people. Let me explain my disagreements: 1) I believe that natural humans cannot change their thoughts or behaviors. But our thoughts and motives matter as much to God as do our behaviorsómaybe they matter even more. The new birth IS real. The Holy Spirit does change our thoughts and motives AND our behaviors. I believe it's misleading and both frustrating and falsely reassuring to tell people that what they think or feel doesn't matter; what matters is what they do. As natural humans, she's right; good behavior saves lives and preserves peace. But people are just a dead spiritually with good behavior and bad attitudes as they are with bad behavior. And there IS hope; we CAN become new people and change. 2) Our pastor pointed out on Sunday that we are not able to forgive directly those who are unrepentant. Even Jesus did not forgive the soldiers who nailed him to the cross. Instead, he surrendered them to the Father and asked Him to forgive them. Similarly, Stephen did not forgive those who stoned him. Instead he turned them over to God, praying that God would not lay that sin to their charge. We are powerless to forgive individuals if they are not repentant; if we tell them we forgive them, we absolve them of guilt they have not acknowledged. But we must give them into God's keeping, letting God take care of justice. Here's my disagreement with Dr. Laura on this issue: No, we can't literally forgive those who are unrepentant. Conversely, however, we can't hold onto their wrong or it will fester our hearts. We must give the right to get even to God, trusting his justice as well as his mercy to deal with them. To say simply that we must not forgive when there's no repentance implies that we can continue to hold someone's sin against them. That's also not our job. Jesus modelled releasing those who sin unrepentantly against us to God. We can find release by letting go of the sin against us and letting God mete out justice and mercy according to his sovereign will. In short, my impressions to pray for her have centered on the conviction that if she could believe that Jesus is the Messiah and the fulfillment of the law, she would be an awesome, loyal, confident witness to the grace of God and the power of Jesus. She could say that people CAN change. We're not doomed to be the flawed people our genes and enviornments have made us to be. Colleen | ||
| Doug222 (Doug222) |
Colleen, I think our concerns are very similar. I see her as a "moralist." She is a strong advocate for doing the right thing--in fact she used to sign off of her program by saing, "now go do the right thing," but I have never heard her acknowledge a power outside of ourselves. She in order to lead a moral life, one simply makes the right choices. As you so aptly pointed out, it denys the depravity of man's condition and as such, denies the need for a saviour. I have heard her counsel many a caller who is in a marriage with someone of a different faith that they simply need to change/remain whatever they are. In other words, if you and your spouse were SDA when you were married and you agreed to raise your kids as such, you need to remain true to that committment for the sake of the family (kids)--even if you receive "new light." I believe she equates spirituality to holding membership in a religous organization. Therefore, what one learns (or believes) is not really important. What is most important, is to "do the right thing." She seems to ignore the fact that what we believe impacts how we act. As far as the forgiveness thing. I have screamed at the radio more than one time when she launched into her tirade about not forgiving someone who has not "repented." Personally, I do not feel that I have the right to withold forgiveness. That is something that only God (who is sinless) can do. I must forgive for my own sake. That means releasing you from the debt that you owe me. That does not mean that God releases them, but it does free me to move on. If I don't forgive, I believe I become like the steward who owed his master a significant sum of money. His master forgave him, then he promptly went out and demanded payment from someone who owed him (my paraphrase). My fascination with Dr Laura occurred while I was in the SDA church. As I came to an understanding of grace, I could not tolerate listening to her anymore. Anyway, thanks for sharing. Doug | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
I agree, Doug. Her advice on religion has driven me to argue with the radio many times. And furthermore, we CAN'T do the right thing. Only the Spirit in God's people can urge humans to do the right thing, and that thing might not look like a moralist or an orthodox Jew would think it should look. Praise God for Jesus; praise Jesus for His atonement; and praise the Holy Spirit for effecting the new birth in us! Colleen | ||
| Loneviking (Loneviking) |
Pheeki, this is in response to the problems with your daughter. I have a 12 y/old who is not in SDA school, so I don't have the indoctrination problem. I am having a lot of fun teaching this kid how to use a reference/study Bible. She doesn't know what cross-references are or what they are for. She is having to learn that some words are added; other words may have an alternate meaning. She is finding out what a concordance is and how to do word studies and map out conclusions for herself. I'm doing this along with her readings for her Bible class at the school she goes too. She really seems to be enjoying this and her grades in Bible are at the top of her class---which is odd, since most of her classmates are Christian kids too. From what she says, most of them haven't been taught how to use these study aids! Maybe you could do the same with your daughter. It's low key, should be non-threatening and it might keep her from being totally sucked in by what she's taught in school and church. Just a thought.............. Bill | ||
| Pheeki (Pheeki) |
Great idea Bill. I will do that. She has asked me for a new Bible with "tabs". |
