Archive through February 12, 2003 Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Former Adventist Fellowship Forum » ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS 2 » QUESTIONS ON SCRIPTURE » Archive through February 12, 2003 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Loneviking
Posted on Saturday, June 30, 2001 - 7:21 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Windmotion,

You're right, those folks that Jesus rejects were fakes! But they looked good; they did and said all the right things; the results of what they did presumably looked pretty good too. That's the problem when we try to evaluate whether someone has Gods' blessing by looking at the results of their ministry---as some inevitably do.

The only guide that is safe to go by is Scripture. Further, this can only be true IF Scripture is the literal, inerrant Word of God that can be trusted as it is written. This is what the big divide between the Fundamentalist christian and the liberal/mainline Christian is and the key issue that every Christian has to decide for themself----how am I going to interpret/obey the Word?

Kelly, who got the ball rolling on this thread, is facing this issue. Do I literally obey what Paul wrote, or do I find some way to explain it away---such as claiming that Paul's writing is to be understood culturally or that Paul was a misogynist. Or, on another thread, do we accept that Hell lasts 'forever', or do we find a way out of this with a claim that Hell lasts just until destruction occurs?

Did you folks know that the SDA church does NOT believe that the Bible is the literal, inerrant Word of God? I was shocked to discover that last month in a discussion with an SDA pastor. He referred me to the book 'Seventh Day Adventists believe', and said that SDA's have never believed that God told man exactly what to write down. SDA's believe in 'thought inspiration'---it's up to man to put those thoughts into words. It's no wonder that some of their theology is so twisted!

Finally, Lydell, let me gently set you straight on a couple of misconceptions you have about the C of C. First, we don't believe that the MIRACULOUS gifts are in evidence today. These gifts were called in Greek 'attesting works'. They were designed to testify to the truth of what the apostles were teaching---and after the close of Scripture there was no further use for them. We DO believe in other gifts such as teaching/preaching/evangelization...etc.

Further, we don't believe that God only speaks through the Bible today---God works in all of our lives. The Holy Spirit is active in the life of every true believer changing that individuals' character into a Godly one. However, the Bible is a closed work--a completed Revelation, and there is nothing more to be revealed that is not within the pages of that book.

G.A....
I'm still puzzled over your question up the thread a little way regarding what the C of C teaches about the Jewish Synagogue and Jewish rites...etc. I really don't understand the question as the Jewish Synagogues didn't control the early Christian church. The Jewish rites were part of the Old Covenant that was done away with--so why would we have to obey them? I'm really confused here!!!:)

Bill
Graceambassador
Posted on Saturday, June 30, 2001 - 8:47 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hey Loneviking:

If you look in the early church history, check WHERE they worshipped, check the council in Jerusalem WHAT discussed and remember that Paul had to circumcise Timothy just to please the early Christians who were Jews.

Also, note the not-so-small rift between Paul and Peter and how Peter reacted when God told him to go see Cornelius and how God taught him with the "unclean" animals.

That is what I was referring to. The old Covenant had been done away with but many early Christians were Jews, including Peter, had to learn about Grace and Paul had to be the one to teach.

I was not accusing the C.C. to preach Judaism. I was only elluding to the fact that SOME C.C. churches, as the Primitive Baptists, take the N.T. so literally that it is hard to say what we should do and why we should do it or not.

I told you before about a fellow that called my church a "sinning church" because we use grape juice instead of wine in the celebration of the Memorial called the Lord's Supper. He claimed that such was a departure of N.T. since Jesus ORDERED us to do ALL HE HAD COMMANDED AS HE HAD COMMANDED. Obviously he was assuming that the formula of the wine used by Jesus was the same he is using in his (the fellow) church. And that it was different from my grape juice. (What a nonsense!) Hence my question to you since SOME C.C. teach the same thing as to taking the commands of Jesus literally. That's where we have the position of some C.C. that maintain that since there is no musical instrument in the gatherings of the NT church, musical instruments should be banished from our worshipping because IT IS NOT INCLUDED IN JESUS' COMMANDS.

You do not have to answer if you are not familiar with this teaching and this type of nonsesical literal following is not practiced in your Church (nonsensical because then we should tithe out of our mint plantation and other Jewish things).

A Fraternal Embrace!

Grace Ambassador
Loneviking
Posted on Sunday, July 01, 2001 - 5:38 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hi G.A.--

Now I get what you are talking about! No, my congregation is a rather liberal, 'Max Lucado' type of church. Where there are literal, specific commands we should follow them. Where there is no specific command we need to look to the examples of the early church as found in Scripture and in the writings of the early church fathers.

The issue of instrumental music is a good example. Under the Old Covenant, worship with instruments was commanded---such as how many blasts on the Shofar at what time, the use of the Lyre and so forth. Odd then, that the New Covenant doesn't specify this and the question is why? The writings of the early church indicate a very simple type of worship service that included only 'a-cappella' singing. Because the CC strive to emulate the early church, this has also been adopted. I don't believe that this is mandatory or that instruments are somehow 'evil', but I have to tell you that if you have ever worshipped in a C of C church where the congregation could really sing I don't think you would miss the instruments at all! (And I'm a trumpet player saying this!).

A warm hug back to you!
Bill
Graceambassador
Posted on Sunday, July 01, 2001 - 7:58 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hi Loneviking!

Thank you! I myself sing a'capella for my AMUSEMENT and everone else's AMAZEMENT!

I love singing a'capella! As you know, however, I am a defender of the position that Paul took: Whatever you do, do it as unto the Lord". This he said in context with the do's and dont's of some of the early Jewish brethren still attached to the strict Jewish worship.

Unfortunately, musical worship in some "churches" became more A PERFORMANCE than worship itself. Also solos, quartets and choirs became so PERFORMANCE ORIENTED that the real sense of heartfelt worship has departed from the such "churches". This is why I enjoy the more open charismatic worship where people appear to be alone in the congregation raising their hands, shedding tears and "making melody" unto the Lord... It is less artistical but potentially (not necessarily) more sincere...

Thank you for answering!

You're blessed according to Eph 1:3.

Grace Ambassador
Dennis
Posted on Sunday, July 01, 2001 - 5:28 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Loneviking,

The SDA pastor was either ignorant or deceptive in telling you that SDAs have NEVER believed in the inerrancy of Scripture. For example, in the late 1950s, QUESTIONS ON DOCTRINE states: "That the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments were given by inspiration of God, contain an all-sufficient revelation of His will to men, and are the only unerring rule of faith and practice (2 Tim. 3:15-017)." (page 11 under FUNDAMENTAL BELIEFS OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS) This book was published in 1957, in an attempt to overcome a cult label in dialogue with Walter Martin, the late cult watcher. The above quotation leaves no room for the writings of Ellen White, so the book was later denounced as a mistake by some key leaders, and publication was discontinued. Walter Martin felt that the White Estate apologists put pressure on the matter by allowing the book to go out of print. I agree with his analysis.

Furthermore, the inerrancy of Scripture was also claimed by the Adventist Church sometime around 1880 (I don't recall the exact year the GC made the proclamation). You see, their current doctrine of making Ellen White a test of fellowship, came about with the Kellogg controversy (power struggle) at the beginning of the 20th century. Willie White got this accomplished for his mother. Consequently, since then, the Adventist Church has found it necessary to accommodate Ellen White by revising their basic belief about Scripture. The 1990 Utrecht statement on Scripture was very lengthy, and it contained loopholes to accommodate extrabiblical literature (i.e., Ellen White's writings).

Dennis J. Fischer
Colleentinker
Posted on Sunday, July 01, 2001 - 5:31 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The difference between performance and worship has impacted me since leaving Adventism and worshiping at a Christian church. I've had a really interesting (read that "painful") journey with my music that began before leaving Adventism.

As I've mentioned before, I was a music major, and ever since I was tiny, I've identified myself as a musician. During my really insecure and painfully shy childhood, playing flute and piano gave me an identity that people respected and that gave me a way to be "somebody". In fact, after becoming an adult and moving a few times, I realized that if people didn't know I was a musician, I felt that they didn't know me.

About ten years ago, Richard and I moved to a church where the community was swimming in talent. A really odd thing began to happen--something that had never happened to me before --I was not able to become involved in the musical community. Even after people knew I played and involved me a few times, I was never acknowledged as a musician. I can't begin to tell you how painful that was for me. The core, essential mark of my unique identity was not acknolwedged.

I did not feel angry at all. I did feel deeply sad, as if I had lost something as precious as life. I think it's fair to say I grieved deeply. I would cry at the most unexpected times--while singing a hymn, while listening to music, while attending a concert--you name it, it if struck a deep chord of beauty, especially musical, I cried. It was not the kind of crying that came from being moved by beauty, although that was involved. It was grief and loss.

During the time when Richard and I were studying the Bible with our neighbors and becoming aware that what we had staked our life on had been a deception, the thought began to lurk at the corner of my mind, "God wanted me to see myself as something other than essentially a musician. He wanted to define me." I didn't know for several years what that might mean, but the thought would not go away.

After we officially left the church and our lives were completely rearranged, the issue of my new identity in Christ began to become more clear. I realized that God had called me to give up everything that had ever defined me. My definition was not "Adventist". It was not "musician". It was not even "writer" or "editor" or "wife" or "mother". It had to be "BELONGS to CHRIST."

I had to belong to Christ, and he had to be my essential identity, not my talents or skills or roles. If asked, I had to know that I am a Christ-follower. That is who I am. Everything else is peripheral. Everything else is temporal. Only Jesus is eternal, and only my identity in Him can outlast change, disease, and death.

The second part of the reality of learning I was a Christ-follower was discovering that when Jesus is my identity, he will ask me to do things I would never consider myself prepared to do or constitutionally suited to do. These things are not dreaded sentences of hard labor; they are actually joyful experiences, but they are joyful because Jesus has assigned them and Jesus himself equips me to do them. It is not my talent or training or temperament that determines my work or my success or failure any more. It is Jesus. And when he assigns a job, it becomes a discovery of his power intersecting my life.

But back to my music. During the past two years I made peace with the fact that music, the one thing on which I probably spent the most energy and time during my life, was not to play a central role in my activities. In Christ my assignments were very different than I had ever pictured them being. And I was, to my astonishment and delight, finding fulfillment and joy in them that suprassed anything music had ever given me. The most remarkable thing is that I no longer see myself as essentially a musician. I know I have training and practice, but I see it on a plane equal to every other thing I've done in my life. It's not my IDENTITY anymore.

Here's the surprise. Last year I played the piano for our Monday evening Bible study worship at Trinity Church. It was the first time I'd accompanied singing in years. It was praise music--not the classic stuff of my training--but it was absolutely wonderful to praise God by playing in a setting where my playing was not a form of PERFORMANCE.

Just this month I've played my flute in public for the first time in three or four years. The circumstances are even more startling than the paise accompanying. I was asked to play in a flute quartet for our school's graduation. The other members of the quartet love to play, but they are definitely amatuer performers. When we met to rehearse, they were not able to sight-read the music. I spent most of the first practice session rehearsing them, teaching them to count their parts, and helping them come in on time.

As I rehearsed them, the thought was powerfully in my mind, a few years ago I would have been annoyed and resentful, and I would have found a reason not to play with them again. I realized that God was giving me back my music, but he was doing it in a whole new way. It was no longer about performing and being "the best"; he was giving me the opportunity to help these other women also be able to perform on the instrument they loved. He was giving me back my music so I could be a servant with it.

When we played at graduation, we were still a group of amateur flutists, most of whom had trouble counting and playing their low notes audibly. Before the ceremony started, one of them said, "Let's pray." The four of us stood in a tight circle with our arms around each other, and one of the women prayed that God would bless the graduation and bless our playing and glorify Himself through our music.

Here's the miracle: from the audience, Richard and friends said, the group sounded professional. We were not professional. From inside, the problems were obvious. But God blessed our performance, and God made our pieces a fragrant offering for him. And I am humbled and awed by the way God is returning music to my life, but it's not about performance anymore; it's about worship.

God doesn't need us to achieve any certain level of accomplishment or training to do the work he gives us. Sometimes he leads us to become skilled at something; sometimes he teaches us himself; sometimes he uses our skills in ways we have not anticipated.

What God wants from us is one thing: to allow Him to be our identity--our everything. Then our hearts can worship him, and he can glorify himself through us!

Praising God for revealing himself through pain and loss and restoration,

Colleen
Graceambassador
Posted on Sunday, July 01, 2001 - 6:12 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Colleen:
Your witness is an example!

I am very musical (what's new, I am Brazilian...) and sometimes tend to go with the flow of the beat or of the "hymn", whichever is the case, and completely lose the sense of what worshipping God really is.

About 10 years ago I decided that my worship would be more God centered and not centered in the feeling that I "felt" (redundance porposeful) when I was singing. I started to study hymnology and totally rejected "unscripural" hymns and progressed into singing the scripture, specially the Psalms with the aid of Hosanna-Integrity.

Today, although I do allow and enjoy musical instruments, they are nothing but aids in my worship. Would they not be there, as they're not in my car, I would worship God anyway. Now the feelings are still present. But what a difference! The feeling is what you called to be " allow God to be our identity" and I enjoy musing all day long songs of joy and songs of praise. Our Body is very musical, and we have a lot of fun worshipping, but our leadership knows when this is shifting into fleshly "following the beat".
I am glad to be a worshipper, whether with or without musical instruments, in a congregational worship or in my individual and private praise and worship!

Praise His name!

Grace Ambassador
Jmorris_4 (Jmorris_4)
Posted on Tuesday, July 02, 2002 - 6:33 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Colleen, I am going through something so very much like you! I was a singer on our 'Praise Team' for almost 7 years. Was "professionally" trained, not considering myself a professional, just was trained by professionals, and even had the opportunity to train with the maranatha singers. I so miss those days, and have also gone through a grieving stage, think I still may be there.
I am going through a bible study with Sherry and am seeing the same thing, that Christ has to be my identity, not Jill the singer, or performer. I felt closest to God during the performances though, I would just get lost in the music and forget the people. It was a certain kind of high i think. There is one statement that I read last night in the study that really got my attention, "If our liberty in Christ is going to be a reality in life, we are going to have to learn to walk in the freedom of Christ, independent of everyone else we know." And I think we can add "everything else we know". I am truly learning to become a new creature in Christ.
Your story really encouraged me. It still gives me hope that God will someday use me again in worship. It is so my heart.
Jill
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Tuesday, July 02, 2002 - 5:04 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Jill, thank you for sharing your experience. I, too, used to feel closest to God when I was performing. And you're rightóthere's a certain kind of "high" in that sort of experience.

I think if God hadn't taken music away from me in the way he did, I would never have been able to embrace the new work he has given me and helped me to do. Something that amazes me in an ongoing, unfolding sort-of way is that God gives us work to do that is really his work. It's not necessarily something we have trained to do or are uniquely qualified to do. God himself teaches us, and, I'm learning, when we do His work, it's really God working through us. We benefit from the growing intimacy with God which is the result of submitting to him and embracing the work and (gulp!) the suffering that goes with it.

So, Jill, your music is not lost nor even gone forever. However it plays out in your life, though, will be a reflection of your trust in Jesus who never does anything by accident! He uses and redeems all of us and all of our experiences!

Praising Him for being my identity (and continuing to teach me how to let him be that to me!),

Colleen
Lydell (Lydell)
Posted on Wednesday, July 03, 2002 - 8:32 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Yes Jill, don't think that God is done with music in your life. It's just something he wanted laid on the altar. Eventually He'll bring it back into your life, only this time it will have His annointing on it.

And don't stop giving yourself to Him in worship in the meantime. There's a song we sing in the Vineyard that says "I'm coming back to the heart of worship, and it's all about You, it's all about You." I believe I remember hearing that the song was written by a worship leader who had to step back and get his own head together on the subject. I've heard that this is a battle that, pretty universally, all musicians have to face at some point.

Ever hear of a man named John Wimber? He was a professional musician (the Righteous Brothers...back in the 60's) when God got hold of him. His heart was literally broken with love for God to the point that he wanted to give back to God. He loaded up all his music one day and hauled it to the city dump, and tossed it in... turning his talent, the money connected with his music, and all back over to the Lord. I guess this was his way of telling God that was it, God could have his talent for whatever He chose to do with it, to include taking it away permanently. God gave it back in a huge way.

That was the beginning of Vineyard worship music. It's something that the Lord has used to touch the lives of literally thousands. It's the kind of thing God does when we give over possession of something and take our identity in Him only.
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Wednesday, July 03, 2002 - 10:15 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Thank you, Lydell. I needed that story today!

Colleen
Susan_2 (Susan_2)
Posted on Monday, February 10, 2003 - 11:16 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

My mom (very sda, not a member though-she and my dad were disfellowshipped over 50 years ago but they stayed loyal to "the truth" anyway) she refers someties to The Lost Books of the Bible, especially the Book of Abraham. I haven't a clue what she is talking about and I just do not want to ask her. So, please can you folks on here let me know what she is speeking of? Thanks.
Jerry (Jerry)
Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 7:15 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

It is a book manufactured by the Latter day Saints (Mormons) in the 1800ís.
Angie (Angie)
Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 2:16 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

what about the books of maccabees?
Jerry (Jerry)
Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 2:33 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Those (2) are much older books sometimes included in the Bible. The section is called the Apocrypha and includes these books:

1 Esdras
2 Esdras
Tobit
Judith
Additions to the Book of Esther
Wisdom of Solomon
Prologue to Wisdom of Jesus Son of Sirach
Wisdom of Jesus Son of Sirach
Baruch
Letter of Jeremiah
Prayer of Azariah
Susanna
Bel and the Dragon
Prayer of Manasseh
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
Gene (Gene)
Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 5:25 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The interesting things about the Book of Abraham are that in the retelling of the story, God instructs Abraham to lie to the king about being Sarah's husband. This is used to justify what Mormons call "lying for the Lord". Apparently, humans are able to determine when God finds it necessary to use deceit.

The other interesting thing I learned about this book is that an actual artifact was displayed as the Book of Abraham, written in some kind of ancient language. It was purported to be the original from which the book was translated. It was later translated, for reals, and turned out to be nothing more than an ancient burial certificate.

Mormons are no more responsive to reality, though, than SDAs.
Susan_2 (Susan_2)
Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 10:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Some people I know (sda's) seem to believe the Lost Books of the Bible are just that-books that God ment to have been included in the Bible but were found too late to be included. I think that's totally wacky. I'll have to snoop in my mons sda trash but I do remember recently reading in one of the sda plublications a quote from the Book of Abraham. Makes sense to me-why wouldn't the sda's quote from other seudo-Christian sources? BTW, I have a very close elderly friend who is disabled that I like to visit with. He is Mormon and his book on natural health and herbal cures and remedies will be plublished soon and you all can go to the health food stores and purchase your own copies. But anyway, I read the manuscript and he quotes egw numerous times throughout his book. Although he is Mormon, he is a big fan of egw's.
Pheeki (Pheeki)
Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 8:44 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I posted a web address recently on the history of Christianity if you want to find it. There is a lot of good information there. I was always curious about the Apocrypha b/c EGW used it some in her writings. However, when I did research on it I determined in my unscholarly mind...that they are really not to be used as Scripture. God put what he wanted in the Bible and preserved it and I believe it is complete- as he wanted it to be.

The Catholic church uses the writings of the Apocrypha to justify worship of Mary...can't tell you exactly which book. Do a search on it on the web and you will see that some of the writings are not consistant with the Cannonized scripture.
Susan_2 (Susan_2)
Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 9:13 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The Bible I mostly use is the New Revised Standard Version and it had the Apocrapha included in it.
Pheeki (Pheeki)
Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 11:15 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I recently read the NRSV version will probably become the accepted version of the bible for Catholics. Perhaps that is why? I am no authority on these things.

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