| Author | Message | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
This is an add-on type discussion. Please enter any heresy you have been taught in your experience in Adventism. Maybe you heard it in a sermon, maybe read it in the Review or other official publication, maybe were taught it in an SDA academy, college or university. Maybe a minister or a professor told it to you privately. It doesn't matter. If you really were taught it by a person in authority, then enter it here. I'll start: HERESY: That Jesus Christ did not REPLACE the Law of Moses with the Law of Himself on the cross. HERESY: That the Sabbath is NOT merely a shadow pointing to Christ, as the shadow of a palm tree at sunrise in the desert points straight to the palm tree. HERESY: That Jesus Christ did NOT sit down at the right hand of our Father in heaven above and thus complete the Investigative Judgment one thousand eight hundred years BEFORE October 22, 1844. HERESY: That Ellen G. White is the Holy Spirit of Prophecy. HERESY: That Jesus Christ is not 100% God, but something less, such as our "elder brother with siniful flesh" or Michael the archangel or "our example" rather than our savior. God bless as you search your memory, Jude | ||
| Colleentinker |
I recently read a heresy in the Adventist Review. It was in an article by Ella Rydzewski in which she was introducing a new column on spirituality and health. She said, "We find completeness in Jesus Christóthe only one who reached ultimate maturity in human form and mended the broken circle back to God. In the Ten Commandments we find the complete law upon which sinlessness is based." First, Jesus did not Reach completeness. He was born complete and sinless. His reaching completeness did not qualify him to mend the broken circle. Second, The Ten Commandments is not the law upon which sinlessness is based. It was the law by which SIN was defined. Sinlessness is based upon something much bigger: God Himself. Sin is not bad deeds. Sin is having a dead spirit, severed from God. | ||
| Plain Patti |
Jude, I have to throw in my pet peeve: HERESY of HERESIES: That we puny, insignificant, sinful people will vindicate the character of God by our sinless lives. That one makes me want to wretch. | ||
| Steve Pitcher |
I agree with Patti. That one, about sinless people vindicating God's character . . . it's perfectly abominable. You already used the word "wretch". I guess I just want to "hurl". One of the first false teachings I ran into was in a Sabbath school class. Folks were all upset about the need to be perfect and the need to watch every step. Well, I didn't know any better, and after a few minutes couldn't keep my mouth shut. I quoted I John 2:1b, "And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." I was quickly and decisively put in my place. I was told that that was not Present Truth. That was truth for that time, but we have further light for today. I guess the truths of Paul, Jesus, Peter, et. al., are not sufficient for some. As for me, I'll take Jesus, Paul, Peter over any so-called Present Truth. Eternal Truth should ALWAYS define Present Truth. | ||
| Julia |
Isn't the teaching that Jesus didn't know if he was going to be raised from the dead a heresy? I never did really beleive that. When I questioned the pastor about it he directed me to The Desire of Ages. Yet I remember hearing them say that they go by "the Bible, and the Bible alone". | ||
| Plain Patti |
Julia, You, of course, are right. John 10:17 The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life--only to take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father." Matthew 18:61 ...and said, "This fellow said, 'I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.'" 62 And the high priest stood up and said, "Have you no answer to make? What is it that these men testify against you?" 63 But Jesus was silent. And the high priest said to him, "I adjure you by the living God, tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God." 64 Jesus said to him, "You have said so. But I tell you, hereafter you will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven." The statement is just plain silly and illogical that Jesus did not know He was going to be resurrected. How could He make the promises of John 14:1-3? How could He speak of coming into His Kingdom? Sometimes one has to be amazed at the downright illogical, let alone unscriptural, backflips SDAs must turn to make Jesus and the Bible "fit" with Ellen! | ||
| Jorden Archer |
What about the heresie about the saved spending 1000 yrs in Heaven going over the "Books of Judgement"? We are asking God to prove to our satisfaction that He was just in His inclusion or elimination of certain people. If we didn't have any more faith in God than that we wouldn't be there. | ||
| Timo K. |
One heresy is to find some parts of the Bible only talking about SDA-people f.ex: Rev.14:12 timo | ||
| jtree |
Ezekiel 13:3-18, 21, talks about those who are WHITE Washed... ".....I will tear down the wall you have covered with WHITEWASH..." Ezekiel | ||
| Julia |
Here's one that always held me in fear. From the Great Controversy:"In that fearful time the righteous must live in the sight of a holy God without an intercessor. " Bible: Heb7:25 Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he ALWAYS lives to intercede for them. Mat 28:20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you ALWAYS, to the very end of the age. | ||
| Dennis J. Fischer |
ELLENESQUE INSIGHTS(direct from the throne of God): That angels will bear little babies to their saved mothers arms in the resurrection. On the other hand, the babies that are from unsaved mothers will be consumed in a moment. Also, slaves and heathen that never heard of salvation will be quickly burned up. Other unsaved persons will burn various lengths of time depending on the amount of sins they have committed. The devil wants the lost to bear their own sins as much as possible, so that he will not have to suffer so much. Furthermore, whenever a Christian repeats a confessed sin, all the sins of his life will be held against him, even though forgiven initially. Wow, how could we have believed all these things! | ||
| Plain Patti |
It takes a long time to sift through all the leftover EGW garbage when one ultimately rejects her inspiration. Even today, after 20 years, I still find myself "believing" something and then wondering if I believe that because it is biblical or because it is from Ellen. Not only that, I have found out that just about every one of the SDAs' favorite catch phrases were from verse snippets or verses taken out of context. For example, in battling what they call "cheap faith," they will use the text in James about "even devils believe and tremble," yet this text says nothing about belief in Jesus Christ. It says, "You believe in one God. So what? Even the devils believe and tremble." And yet they will spring that one on you eventually if you try to discuss "faith alone" with them. (This, btw, is a favorite text of the Catholic apologists also.) Another one, that Adam and Eve kept the sabbath in Eden. Just where is THAT in the Bible? Another one, that the "law" was in existence before Sinai. Romans 5 contradicts this one outright. Another one, that there is a dichotomy of law; that sometimes in the Scriptures "law" refers to the moral law only; sometimes it refers to the ceremonial law only. Anyway, I am sure you could add many more to the list. One has to totally reprogram his/her thinking and sometimes it takes years. I am just thankful that God chose to show me His great mercy. I wish I had been worthy of this great honor, but I was/am not. I am overwhelmed that He would reach down to such an unworthy and rebellious little worm as I. Grace and peace, Patti | ||
| Ray Pitts |
Dr. Arthur patrick of La Sierra Univ. wrote a good paper on EGW. Here are some of his findings. 1. To surrender the shut door is to move toward outer darkness. James White, 1845 2. To marry is to deny the Advent faith and be ensnared by a wile of the Devil. James White, 1846 3. To discourage her husband from engaging in sexual intercourse is the duty of the Christian wife. EGW, 1868 4. The young may be directed away from masturbation by awareness of the diseases it causes. 5. To leave Adventism is to identify with the wicked world in which there is no possibility of salvation for the backslider or the world. EGW, 1846 6. To wittness to other Christians is to cast pearls before swine. James White, 1846 The web address is... http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/white/EGW-teachers.html | ||
| sherry |
Because I have newly left the church, these quotes your showing are great, but could you please also include book and page # so those of us just leaving the church can do their homework. I don't want to believe another thing that comes across my plate without thoroughly researching it first. If I'd researched many years earlier I might've left a lot sooner. Thanks for your understanding... | ||
| Dennis J. Fischer |
Ellen White's writings comprise 17 times more volume than the Holy Scriptures. My wife and I are still in a "deprogramming stage" as we find ourselves repeatedly confused whether our thoughts are from EGW or the Bible. Many Adventists are content to view the Bible through the "lesser light." There are incredible simularities between the writings of Joseph Smith and Ellen White. This will be shown in a forthcoming book soon with nearly twenty years of research. I communicate with the author occasionally for updates. The author has shared some segments of the manuscript for my review. The content is very well researched, and it is presented in an objective manner. There will be several surprises for the devotees of Ellen White. | ||
| Max Gordon Phillips |
Dennis, Have you ever thought much about the metaphorical aspect of the term "lesser light leading to the greater light"? It makes no sense at all. Consider the children of Israel fleeing the Egyptians in the dead of night with the "pillar of fire" as "the greater light"! Now, all of those people out there can see this great light! What need would they have of some 16th century BC "prophet" carrying a pitch torch -- "the lesser light" so that the people could find and see "the greater light" that probably filled half the night sky? The whole idea is ludicrous. Or consider another illustrative analysis, an even better one: Consider the people in the wilderness during the day. The sun is burning almost directly overhead. Now along comes this same "prophet' shining a flashlight around so that people could find and see the sun! Again, the idea is ludicrous! There's just no logic that can make this metaphor fit! I floated this "criticism" of "the metaphorical" Ellen White in my Wednesday night Bible-study-and-prayer group, which is made up predominantly of hardcore Adventists. (Yes, I get along with them just fine.) One time I asked, "Did you ever try to find the sun with a flashlight? One hardcore answered, "Well, no, but inside your house at night a flashlight might help you find a lightswitch." (I did not disabuse her or try to embarrass here with "a comeback." But others in the room grumbled that her explanation didn't fit their experiences with the Bible or explain the metaphor.) And indeed, under this explanation, the metaphor really comes apart. For the "greater light" isn't even a light, but a light SWITCH! No longer is the metaphor, "the lesser light leading to the greater light." Now it is, "the lesser light leading to the light switch"! Suddenly Scripture is "a light switch"! The truth is that this metaphor is ill-bred and heretical in and of itself. Only our Adventist friends are so cultified that they can't see it or question it of think of it in logical terms. They're just stuck with it -- and all they can do is to get angry with you for pointing out its heretical flaws. A similar mis-metaphor is one flung at you when you disagree with some "cherished doctrine," such as the investigative judgment. They say, "You're throwing out the baby with the bathwater." You respond, "If the baby is Christ, then how am I throwing out the baby Jesus?" They can't answer. The reason: For them the baby isn't Jesus at all: It's CHURCH MEMBERSHIP! That's what's really precious to them and the raison d'etre for the metaphor. One of them said to me that she thought of her "in good and regular standing" church membership as "my ticket to heaven"! I kid you not. Keeping the Baby, Max | ||
| sherry |
another one to add to the list is in Spiritual Gifts Vol. 1 she tells how the slave will be as though he never was.....when I read that, I'm thinking...I thought everyone had a part in the first or second resurrection...and every knee shall bow before God. | ||
| sherry |
Ok, help me on this one. While discussing 1844, Holy place vs. Most Holy Place they did bring these texts up to show that he was still in the Holy Place. Rev 1:12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; Rev 1:13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks [one] like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. not in the most holy from this... Anyone? | ||
| sherry |
ok...maybe I get this...this is highly symbolic of the 7 churches and has nothing to do with the Holy Place? | ||
| Max |
Sherry, I've pondered long and hard over what Ellen White meant by saying the slave "will be as though he never was." And I've finally decided it is a meaningless statement. For it cannot be true. The slave's master, for one, would remember, not to mention all the other people who knew the slave. And what if the slave were freed by Lincoln's Empncepation Proclamation of 1864! Would he then NOT be as though he never was? Would God wipe from the memory of everyone who ever knew the slave? Maybe the slave was taken from Africa to the U.S. on a "slaver" vessel. What about the slave's family back in Africa who, let us say, encountered missionaries and found Christ through them. Would God then wipe from their minds all memories of their family member who was snached by slavers, freighted to the U.S. and sold on an auction block in New Orleans to some planter from "My Old Kentucky Home"? The more you think about her explanation, the more ridiculous it becomes. And if you no longer attach any "scriptural authority" to it, you are free to see it for what it actually is: nonsense! An not just harmless nonsense either, but rather vicioius racist nonsense. For, what about the slave's living decendents, freed and living in the U.S.? Maybe members of the SDA church? Maybe even readers of Ellen White? Reading that hideous statement? "Oh?" they could well reason, "so THAT'S what's going to happen to grandpa and grandma! They're going "to be as though they never were"! That means the whole family reunion can look forward to a BRAIN WIPE from God!" Yes, and there's more. But I think you get the point: It's unscriptural, really vicious nonsense. Max |
