ADVENTISTS PUT THE IMMINENT RETURN OF... Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Former Adventist Fellowship Forum » ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS 2 » ADVENTISTS PUT THE IMMINENT RETURN OF JESUS ON HOLD « Previous Next »

Author Message
Dennis (Dennis)
Posted on Friday, June 20, 2003 - 6:23 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

This week the Adventist Review (Online Edition) is heralding two paradoxical press reports. These two news articles; namely, "FOURTH COMMANDMENT GOES TO COURT" and "BARRY BLACK NAMED UNITED STATES SENATE CHAPLAIN," go against everything Seventh-day Adventists believe in regarding their eschatological time line.

First of all, Portland Adventist Academy is blatantly disregarding the counsels of Ellen White in playing competitive sports with the "heathen." Secondly, their utilizing the secular court system to get their way is also condemned by Ellen White. Due to long-distance transportation being usually involved, these sports tournaments are held on no-school days. This court victory for Adventists is nothing less than a SABBATH LAW that forces other athletes, parents, school personnel, and coaches to observe the Jewish Sabbath by not engaging in competitive sports on Friday nights and Saturdays.

What we need to fear are SABBATH LAWS not Sunday Laws if Adventists have their way. Adventists apparently do not concern themselves about the inconvenience of non-Sabbatarians in complying with their strict SABBATH LAWS. Furthermore, this is reverse discrimination in its purest form--another "separating wall" as Ellen White stated.

How will Adventists in the pew interpret this news of Admiral Barry Black becoming the United States Senate chaplain? Surely, SDAs will not expect a "death decree" while Pastor Black is the Senate Chaplain. Consequently, according to the Seventh-day Adventist end-times scenario, the imminent return of Jesus is put on hold. Jesus cannot return while an SDA chaplain is presiding in the Senate. Without a "death decree" first, Jesus cannot return.

If this all sounds like a paradoxical bunch of foolishness, your thoughts are united with mine. Obviously, the end-times are not supporting the unbiblical, extrabiblical SDA hypothesis.

Dennis J. Fischer
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Saturday, June 21, 2003 - 12:16 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dennis, such a great post! Your description of the whole mess being a "paradoxical bunch of foolishness" is right on.

It is amazing, isn't it, that Adventist will not hesitate to trumpet the public honors one of theirs receives, even if they defy their traditional teachings.

The Portland Adventist Academy thing is particularly interesting to me. As I posted a week or so ago, I went to that school when competitive games were just getting started, and there was definite dialogue about the rightness or wrongness of competing with outside schools. They might be able to justify competing against other Adventist academies, but there was no clear consenses about competing against public schools.

I've always been amazed that their particular rights and privileges are causes for public and/or legal defense, and it doesn't matter who else suffers because of their rights. Somehow the fact thay they believe they are RIGHT justifies everything!

Great point, though, about their teaching of the end-times not jiving with these developments!

Colleen
Steve (Steve)
Posted on Saturday, June 21, 2003 - 12:48 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dennis,

Excellent review of the Review.

A couple of tidbits directly in line with the title of this thread:

1. "Had Adventists, after the great disappointment in 1844, held fast their faith, ... they would have seen the salvation of God, the Lord would have wrought mightily with their efforts, the work would have been completed, and Christ would have come ere this to receive His people to their reward." Selected Messages, book 1, 68.

EGW taught that the SDA people controlled the time of Christ's return.

2. "The light that is to lighten the whole earth with its glory was resisted, and by the action of our own brethren has been in a great degree kept away from the world." Selected Messages, book 1, 234-235.

This was in reference to God being kept from imparting the power of the Holy Spirit in 1888.

And then for me, the most amazing statement I've seen from an SDA (former SDA, now Orthodox SDA) follows these quotes.

Ron Spears states in his new book, Rebellion:

"Our rebellion also delayed Christ's second coming. Another question must be addressed. Are we not then accountable for World Wars I and II, and for all other wars and human tragedy of the entire twentieth century? How about the millions of people who have gone to their graves without the hope of a resurection?" Rebellion, p. 25.

Not only have they put Jesus' return on hold, they are responsible for the murder of 6 million Jews, 12 million Christians, all modern child abuse, the pornography industry, abusive governments, the explosion of false Christ's on the world scene (hmmmmm, I guess if it wasn't for the SDA failures, then Jesus' prophecies would not have come true) and all other atrocities and evils great and small.

The further away I get (Bob!) the more it looks like EGW & SDA are attempting to BE God, while denigrating God to a supporting crew member.

Maybe God is the SDA's "Best Boy Grip" of the end-time movie.

Steve
Doug222 (Doug222)
Posted on Saturday, June 21, 2003 - 6:57 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dennis,
I may be a little slow on the uptake, but I didn't totally get your statement that by suing for the right to fully participate in inter-schoastic sports that the SDA's were defacto forcing other religios groups to observe the Jewish Sabbath--certainly not to the point of paralleling the famed "Sunday legislation."

Correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding of the PAA law suit was to require schedulers to reasonably accommodate the Adventist's religious beliefs by scheduling all their games during non-Sabbath hours. It doesn't prevent other games from occurring on Friday nights or Saturdays. I don't see a problem with this position. We live in a multi-cultural society, and we should not designate any group as "second-class citizens," simply because their religious beliefs place them in the minority.

I was one of those Adventist kids who grew up primarily going to public schools. I cannot even begin to tell you the anguish it caused me to never be able to participate in any sports or other extra-curricular activities because of the Sabbath conflicts. I don't think think this is anywhere near the problem that it used to be, but it is a problem none-the less.

Unfortunately, this ruling only benefits those "(un)fortunate" enough to afford/support Adventist education. It does little for the poor Adventist kid who is stuck in a public school. The difficuly that I have with this situation is that school districts readily respect the rights of mainstream Christians by eliminating all activities on Sundays, so as not to conflict with the religious beliefs of the majority, while wholly ignoring the religious beliefs of the minority. If religion is a consideration in scheduling (and it is), then all religious views should be considered, not just some.

In His Grace

Doug
Loneviking (Loneviking)
Posted on Saturday, June 21, 2003 - 7:58 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Doug, no it's not an issue of merely scheduling all of the SDA Academy games during the Sabbath. This league apparently has to play most of it's games on the weekends. (I really don't understand why as the leagues here in So-Cal play both weekday and weekend games).

Anyway, most leagues want to schedule the final few games leading up to the championships on the weekends so more folks can attend. Usually then, games are played on BOTH Sat. and Sunday afternoon so that the season can close out with the school year. So it's going to involve a lot of juggling around with the schedule---especially since now anybody with a religious gripe can demand schedule changes.

Actually though, what the league will have to show is that they made a good faith attempt at 'reasonable accomadation'. From what I'm reading of the lawsuit, the court is saying that refusing to make any accomadation is de facto discrimination on the basis of religious belief. Now the issue goes back to a trial court or administrative court to see if the league attempted to make a reasonable accomadation. The league claims to have tried to reschedule to include the academy, but that there was just no way to do so without some games being on Saturday.

After all, the SDA's are playing non-SDA schools, aren't they?
Doug222 (Doug222)
Posted on Saturday, June 21, 2003 - 9:16 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Loneviking,
I agree that they need to show that they have attempted to make a reasonable accommodation. I think that is all the courts will require. In the past, school districts have essentially said, "too said, too bad, this is when the games are, take it or leave it."

As it relates to tournaments that don't take religion into consideration (i.e. games being played all weekend), I do not see them having to do a whole lot of accommodating--especially if changing the time of one game is going to throw the whole tournament off. However, during the regular season, there should not really be any problem rescheduling games that happen to fall on a Saturday--especially since they took religious views into consideration by not scheduling any games on Sundays. Its not unheard of to postpone games and play them at a later date for any number of reasons (weather, emergencies, mechanical failures, etc.). Why not religious beliefs.

I happen to agree with the courts in this case, although I see the point that Dennis and Colleen were making about the whole idea of suing and competition flying in the face of EGW's coun
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Saturday, June 21, 2003 - 11:51 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Right. The biggest problem with the PAA affair is that they're blatantly discounting EGW's clear "counsel" by competing and suing. It seems that the whole question of religious accomodation ought to be a moot point. They're trying to get legal permission, (which EGW said not to do) to reschedule a whole league to accommodate their participation in something else they're not supposed to be doing.

In the process, in today's society of tolerance, they look noble and are acknowledged for their integrity of beliefs and practice when behind it all they're in blatant violation of their own policies. It's all so ironic!

The religious acommodation issue is interesting when the tables are turned. A non-Adventist I know who works at an SDA institution was informed (he/she) had to appear for a work day on Sunday in order to do physical repairs on a building. They carefully scheduled it for Sunday so the whole "volunteer" crew could keep Sabbath. Since the repairs were happening in the work space of said person, this person had to be there. Administrators were also participating.

It was well-known this person was not SDA, but no accommodation was offered. Said person announced they'd be gone for a couple of hours, attended church, and was available afterwards for work. It worked out OK, but there was a reasonable amount of trepidation as said person worked to arrive at a plan of action that would allow him/her to attend church.

Again, it's all so very ironic.

Colleen
Susan_2 (Susan_2)
Posted on Wednesday, June 25, 2003 - 11:29 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Berry Black is what I would refer to as the current crown jewel of the SDA denomination. He is becomming a real icon. The sda's I know are just in awe of him, very similiar to how they are with Ben Carson. I know ALOT of sda's and thewy like to "hold up" the sda's that they can to make their point that God is theirs and theirs alone. It used to be that doctor down in Loma Linda who was doing all those baby heart transplants but then it was Ben Carson for a long time and now the awe is going to Barry Black, who I personally have great respect for. But, I would have great respect for all of our dedicated, hard-working clergy who meet the spiritual needs of our military personelle.
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Wednesday, June 25, 2003 - 9:48 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I just had to come and share what I just heard while driving home. Lonnie Melashanko was giving the daily Voice of prophecy broadcast (on a local Christian station, I might add!), and he was talking about the second coming. He was asking, how can we avoid being deceived and being unprepared for the REAL THING when it happens? (Of course, the context of this included many references to The Left Behind series, i.e. What if they're wrong?)

He said that the way to avoid being deceived was to be "in a relationship with Jesus" and to be involved in true worship of God. He actually summarized by saying that in order to be ready, those two things are needed: Be in a relationship with Jesus, and be giving true worship to God the Father.

You know, if an unsuspecting listener doesn't understand what's he's saying, it would be so easy for him or her to be sucked in. Of course we need a relationship with Jesus. Of course we are to worship God. But he said those TWO things were necessary to be ready.

Of course, he didn't explain what he REALLY meant by giving true worship to God. But I realized that if anyone were really listening to what he said, he just admitted that Sabbath is necessary. Contrary to what most Adventists now say (at least in So. Cal), Sabbath IS necessary to go to heaven, at least if one is alive when Jesus comes!

The wording seems so innocuous; one really must listen carefully to hear the heresy: Two requirements to be saved when Jesus comes?!

OK, I'm calming down now!

I am so thankful that God is sovereign, and he will draw people to himself and reveal truth regardless of how badly any of us misrepresent him at any time!

Colleen
Susan_2 (Susan_2)
Posted on Thursday, June 26, 2003 - 11:17 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Colleen and the others, Do any of you read the Review? I read the current issue last night. The very first article is titled, "In Defense of Obedience". It was written by a man whose last name is Johnsson. He quotes several texts in Romans and Hebrews and then ends up the article that in order to have the blessing of grace we must prove full and true obedience to the 10 commandments. I guess you can read the article on-line. I think it is in the world edition. It is in the free edition of the Review that all sda's get that they don't have to pay extra for.
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Friday, June 27, 2003 - 12:00 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Johnsson is the editor of the Adventist Review. I did read that article. I thought he tried to make it sound evangelical, an effort which left me a bit confused. He said, "Obedience means that we acknowledge Someone greater than ourselves, whose will, not ours is sovereign. Somone who is not only Savior but our Lord."

He went on to say the opposite of obedience is defiance.

The part that bothered me was that he didn't overtly say obedience to WHAT. He sort-of left that undefined and nebulous. He neither talked about obedience to Jesus nor overtly said we must obey the 10 commandments.

Of course, I read him as saying we must obey the commandments. He was just very careful how he worded it--so careful that he didn't actually say what he meant (although he hinted broadly to those of us who know what Adventism teaches!) Confusion reigns!

I am so thankful for the Bible and for Jesus and for his revelation of himself and for his calling us!

Colleen
Charlene_2 (Charlene_2)
Posted on Friday, June 27, 2003 - 1:46 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Yes Colleen,
I had the invitation to sit in on a liberal Adventist meeting in my mothers home. I was visiting at the time. The SDA's who were present were "liberal" in thier self-view. I felt more sorry for them than for the "right-wing". At least the "right-wing", "hard-core", know who they are in their association. The liberals, as they like to be called, are so far from Adventism (as it truly IS), that one can't help but feel their deep inner turmoil. They wan't to be free of all the trapping's of this false religion; but they can't bring themselves to call a spade a spade. Yet, that is why they have formed their own "liberal" group. I felt such pitty for them. They truly longed for something true, but dared not venture past the possibility of a "false spirit of prophecy". I could physically feel the confusion and frustration. Each was literally "spiritually dying" to voice their opionons on EGW; however, they were stunted by the "spirit of slavery". I knew at that point how extreme the battle in the spiritual realm is. Make no mistake-- it is real! This war is as real as the one being fought overseas. I knew then that only the Holy Spirit can break through such a blinding evil. I felt the burden of these dear people. How I wanted to help them, but I could not. Also, the funny thing was that as much as these liberal SDA's wanted to "remake" their religion, I would have found the conservatives more honest to deal with. The reason for this is simple. The conservative SDA's are true SDA's-they believe what they "know" to be true. The liberals take what they want and disregard the rest. That only breeds double confusion! How can one debate absolute biblical truth with such wishy-washy theology. Impossible. Of course in retrospect, I understand this type of self-preservation. If one error in EGW's doctrine falls they all go down.
Charlene Godbee
chargodbee@aol.com
P.s.- As always I thank Christ for this ministy.
Sabra (Sabra)
Posted on Friday, June 27, 2003 - 1:59 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Forgive me if this is not exactly on topic, I need some help here with a Sabbath keeper who is discussing the 70th week of Daniel. He is not SDA, doesn't even go to church because he can't find one he agrees with but anyways....he believes, like the SDA's that the 70th week has been completed and he asks:

I understand your placing the end of the 62 weeks at Jesus death . . . but what did jesus mean in this verse?

Mr 1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.[/b]

Why was Simeon waiting for the consolation of Israel? Was it because He knew the "time?"

What "time" was fulfilled at the beginning of Jesus' ministry?

I replied Galatians 4:4-6 but he still wants what time? Why is it not the same time of Daniel 9. My thought is that it is the "time" of the law but that isn't exactly how I want to explain it. I know Isaiah 7 helps with this....any help appreciated.

Blessings!
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Friday, June 27, 2003 - 4:28 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Sabra, the sign of Immanuel in Isaiah 7 appears to have had more than one fulfillment, the ultimate being Jesus. The prophecy directly related to the Assyrian invasion which came a few years after the prophecy, destroyed the land and agricultural activity, and left only the simple diet (yogurt and honey) of those who lived off the land. God promised a sign, the birth of a boy to a young woman wo was then about to be married. (The Hebrew word translated "virgin" referred to a woman about to be married.)

But, like so many prophecies, it had successive fulfillments, Jesus being the ultimate. Jesus, after all was not a sign; he was the actual reality. Matthew quotes this verse in Matt. 1:23 and says that the announcement of Jesus' birth to both Mary and to Joseph was to fulfill this prophecy.

You know, Sabra, I don't think we can say with absolute certainty which "time" was fulfilled at the beginning of Jesus' ministry. I tend to believe that the 70th week has not been fulfilled yet, but I can't give iron-clad proof for this belief.

People who "fixate" on analyzing and proving these time prophecies are focussing on the wrong things, I think. If Jesus isn't the focus of their time and attention, they may completely miss the real thing and be deceived by the prophetic suggestions for which we have no absolute interpretation yet.

I think your answer of Galatians 4:4-6 is a wonderful answer! Any more than than is speculation!

Colleen
Sabra (Sabra)
Posted on Friday, June 27, 2003 - 4:48 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Thank you Colleen,

I didn't realize that there was no proof that the 70th week hasn't been fulfilled. Without the SDA background it seems so simply written: After 62 Messiah shall be cut off, the end will be with a flood, the pronce to come will confirm a convenant with many for one week, bring an end to sacrifice...and the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate even until the consummation, which is detrmined is poured out on the desolate...If I never had any doctrine pumped itno my head I would think that said just what I think it says.

Anyways, he writes back:
Actually, I think Gal. 4:4-6 only adds to the question, for I can again ask, What was the "time" whose "fullness of" had come which Paul was referring? Certainly the "time" was predetermined by God, and as God stated, "Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets."

Was that not what God did for Daniel? Reveal a time line? Why would not Daniel's time line be the "time" Jesus was referring to when He stated "the time is fulfilled?" Do you view that as inconceivable?

Galations does indeed answers why God sent forth His Son, "that we might receive the adoption of sons . . . " but not what the "time" fulfilled was. That is my question, "What was the time which was fulfilled?"

Seeing as to how the only prophetic time line mentioned concerning when Messiah would come is in Daniel 9, why wouldn't it be the exact "time" Jesus was speaking of?
**************end quote***
I think he is sincere, if there is no way to know then I guess, what's the point?
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2

Post Number: 564
Registered: 11-2002
Posted on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 2:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Were the rest of you out there taught that the SDA church and its people have the responsibility of the far-off or immenant coming of Jesus? Do any of you others think this is a really cultic doctrine and that it can produce loads of bad feelings and guilt among the people who actually believe this? I mean, if a person honestly believes that his/her actions have that much control over God and Jesus does not come then won't the person feel responsible for holding up this great event? I think this is a very spiritually and emotionally destructive teaching.
Leigh
Registered user
Username: Leigh

Post Number: 93
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 3:09 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Yes, Susan, I was taught that. I remember reading it in EGW's writings where she stated that if the people were really ready, He would have come in 1844. God is SOOO much bigger than EGW made him out to be. We are not in control. God is.
Conniegodenick
Registered user
Username: Conniegodenick

Post Number: 20
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 7:32 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I was also taught that our behaviors/obedience determined when Jesus was coming back--the implication being that we were not righteous enough. That is straight from Ellen White. She actually said that Jesus would have come back in the 1800's if they had just followed the teachings more closely. I remember feeling grateful that they hadn't o/w I wouldn't be here. But then I always felt guilty that I wasn't living up to enough truth or evangelizing enough so that now I was one of the ones holding up the 2nd Coming.

The longer I'm away the more cultic they appear. When I'm with SDA's I don't feel free to express my faith in God or talk about His leading because I know they are thinking, "she's apostate now and God surely couldn't be working in her life. She's not keeping the Sabbath etc." I remember from Ellen White (I got a MUCH heavier dose of her than most--my dad read from her once or twice per day for "family worship"--2 words that still strike terror into my heart) that if I had unconfessed sins that God wouldn't listen to my prayers anyway. Wow--what was I to do? I couldn't seem to remember them all and I also seemed to sin daily in multiple ways (wrong thoughts, eating between meals, the list was endless) and that's why I NEVER had a personal relationship with God while young. I just gave up and pretended to for all my teachers/mentors that were observing me.

Again, so grateful to be out. Non-SDA's have NO IDEA what we struggle against. Those wrong doctrines are still in my head even though I know they're wrong. It will take YEARS to deprogram me!

Having said that, I still enjoy a sense of freedom that I never had in the past. God feels much more present in my life and the guilt is gone!
Dennis
Registered user
Username: Dennis

Post Number: 75
Registered: 4-2000
Posted on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 9:51 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ellen White clearly taught that SDAs have the ability to delay or hasten Christ's return. Her hallmark statement on this topic is found in COL,page 69 as follows:

"Christ is waiting with a longing desire for the manifestation of himself in his church, and when the character of Christ shall be PERFECTLY REPRODUCED in his people, then he will come to claim them as his own."

Being that I discarded all her books in my library, I cited the above-quotation from memory. Sadly, I have preached many perfectionist-type sermons that included this statement.

Dennis J. Fischer
Sabra
Registered user
Username: Sabra

Post Number: 88
Registered: 10-2001
Posted on Sunday, May 23, 2004 - 12:34 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

So much for the longsuffering of God, unwilling that any should perish.
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2

Post Number: 570
Registered: 11-2002
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 5:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Fortunatelly I didn't have to endore "familyworship"> I'm an only child and even though my mom tried it a few times my dad and me weren't very cooperative. My SDA cousins still have what they refer to as "family worship" and they read from The Great Controversery. Makes no sense at all to me. Martin Luther strongly taught that Christians should have a morning and evening family worship. The format laid down by ML is prayer, a breif Bible passage, preferably one focusing on Grace and Forgiveness and then in the evening reciting the Our Father again with a Bible reading and he encouraged reciting the Creeds. Sure is a different emphasis.

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.

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