| Author |
Message |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 354
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 05, 2004 - 1:27 pm: |     |
We recntly had an interesting exchange with a person who considers himself to be a 'former Adventist", but apparently is still a Sabbatarian. In the course of this conversation, a reference was made to the text in Hebrews 10:19-22 where the author says the curtain was Jesus' body, and subsequently in verses 26-29 where it says that if we treat the blood of Jesus as an unholy thing, or if we "trample the Son of God underfoot," there's no sacrifice left for us.
This person's immediate response was, "That text shouldn't be in the Bible." When I asked why he thought it was there, he responded that perhaps the writer had too much pizza the night before. This passage, he said, opposed the gospel.
As the conversation continued, he referred to Romans 5:15 which says, "But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many [or "all men," in some translations]."
It became clear that this person was saying two things which I found upset me greatly: the Bible is not 100% reliable as the inerrant word of God, and salvation came to EVERYONE. In fact, this person said that God would not allow salvation to depend upon a fallible human decision to accept Jesus or not. God satisfied His justice at the cross, and all people are now saved. He declared that this teaching was the gospel.
When I countered with the words of Jesus in Jonn 3:18 that all who do not believe stand condmned already, he had no direct answer, but he reiterated that such a belief was NOT good news. Good news is that ALL are saved.
Further, he held that God's justice was satisfied on the cross; His grace goes on forever, but His justice is finished and done and is no longer an issue. (Not surprising--that's probably a logical outcome of the Adventist disbelief in eternal hell.)
This person is not isolated; I know of a couple of Adventists churches in this area that have been preaching this sort of "gospel". I really feel upset about the numbers of people who have been drawn by the concept of "grace", but have been taught "grace" without the teaching of God's justice. God's justice is eternal; it is an attribute of God, and it is eternally part of Him--just as His grace is an eternal part of Him. Grace, however, has absolutely no meaning without God's justice as the foundation of His grace.
Further, these same people are learning that the Bible is not reliable. This person had no way to explain how his belief in universal salvation can be reconciled with the many texts that link salvation to belief/acceptance of Jesus.
I want to ask, if one can't rely on the texts that teach acceptance of Jesus as the way to salvation, how can one rely on the texts that suggest God's grace is for all? (Of course God's grace is for all; we need to accept it.)
Altogether it was a conversation with no resolution, although it ended amicably. I'm left with a huge frustration about the non-gospel so many people are being taught under the name "The Good News". If one cannot rely on the Bible, if one cannot believe that God will be just forever, what does one have? The gospel does not leave us unaccountable. Quite the contrary; it holds us accountable to our Savior, and it leads us deeper and deeper into trust and surrender.
The "gospel" this man was espousing required no accountability, surrender, or personal risk. In fact, it required no relationship with Jesus. Further, I believe that a relationship with Jesus confirms the authenticity of the Bible and also confirms the eternal justice and mercy of God. Salvation is no longer a theory; it is a reality born of a personal "knowing" of Jesus.
Have any of you encountered these kinds of teachings within "Adventism" and it's fringes?
Colleen |
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2
Post Number: 646
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Monday, July 05, 2004 - 2:35 pm: | |
Colleen, I hope you are cool with this person still adhearing to the Sabbath. Being a Sabbahtarian and being a Sabbath-keeper of the SDA persuasion are at totally opposite ends of the Sabbath issue. I actually was a member of a local Seventh-day Baptist church for many years so I know from personal experience one can be Sabbathtatian without holding Keeping the Sabbath as a part of a salvation issue, which we who grew up SDA were taught. Also, as a Christian I believe my eternal salvation is based upon my belief and my faith through the Grace given to us from Jesus, his atonement for my sins and all that. At the same time I read in m Bible where God says he has other sheep that are not part of this fold. The Hindu's nd the Buddhists got way back in history to before Christianity as do some other religions, Shinto, etc. Frankly it is my belief that these are what that text referrs to. But, back to your question-as far as your semi-ex-SDA friend goes-some people absoutelly cannot understand the basic concept of Christianity and pure grace. I think this is especially tre of those in works religions, the SDA, the JW and the LDS to name a few. Fortunatelly God is a fair and a just God and He and He only is our judge. I try to wittness my Christianity and when asked to explain it with words I try to do so. I don't even try to explain any more than I think the person has the capability to understand. It's too frustrating to me and to the other person. I hope this explains how I see it. |
Sabra
Registered user
Username: Sabra
Post Number: 121
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Monday, July 05, 2004 - 3:06 pm: | |
Colleen,
Looks like more ear tickling heresy to me. I guess you have to throw out a big portion of the Bible to believe that.
Yeah, it sounds like good news until you hear, "depart from Me you workers of iniquity."
I have never heard Adventists say this (except maybe Brad--and you all really need to keep him in prayer) but I have heard a few others.
Good to know the doctrines of demons aren't subject to us! |
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2
Post Number: 649
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Monday, July 05, 2004 - 3:22 pm: | |
I remember as a child listening to my SDA grown-up relatives wondering if Paul's writings should even have been included in the Bible because they were so different from the truth found in Ex. and Duet. and EGW. So,yes, I have grown up knowing SDA's who question the validity o certian Bible tests, passages and entire books. When the Bible does not agre with their beliefs then they say the Bible wasn't interperted correctly. Just last night I went on a different website and read the criteria of what makes up a "Christian cult" and of the eight things listed the one I wrote is one of them, saying the Bible is wrong and that the organization is right. |
Chris
Registered user
Username: Chris
Post Number: 352
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 05, 2004 - 7:00 pm: | |
Yes Colleen, I have seen this. I know a SDA pastor that teaches at the SDA College here. He does not believe the Bible is the word of God, only that it is one expression of what people of a certain culture and time thought God might be like. In addition, he supports universalism as the only option for a truly loving god. It all makes me rather ill.
I also am on Don Hawley's mailing list (former SDA pastor - still sabbatarian). Don has many good interesting things to say, but I have seen him promote at least twice a website on: Biblical universalism. The idea here is that it's theoretically possible to absolutely possitively demand that God not save you, but everyone will have so many chances even in the afterlife to accept salvation that it's highly unlikely that any but a handful of people throughout history will be able to succesfully resist salvation to the bitter end. In this view it is not at all necessary to accept Christ as God will save almost everyone even if they haven't heard of Christ and don't care a thing about Him. This view is a slight twist on standard universalism. As far as I can tell it's a ploy to not have to deal with the texts that clearly state some will be lost. |
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2
Post Number: 651
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Monday, July 05, 2004 - 8:55 pm: | |
So answer this for me. If they believe when the end comes we're all gonna get to navara anyway then how come they make such a big deal about SDA's like us on this forum who are Christians but are not SDA? Makes no sense at all. |
Loneviking
Registered user
Username: Loneviking
Post Number: 265
Registered: 7-2000
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2004 - 12:03 am: | |
Colleen,
What the individual you talked too believes is an extreme form of Arianism. You might want to pick up two books 'Why I am not Arian' and 'Why I am not a Calvanist'. I heard the authors of both of these books (on the radio) debating the question of 'who is saved', 'how do you know who is saved'..etc.
It doesn't surprise me to find SDA's that don't believe in the inerrancy of Scripture as that is the result of also believing in thought inspiration. I haven't encountered these beliefs where I'm at. These folks around here are too enamored with Amazing Facts and Doug Batchelor. In fact, the new pastor around here worked for Amazing Facts for a time.
Sometimes I don't know which position is scarier and more cultic!
Bill |
Patrickfoy
Registered user
Username: Patrickfoy
Post Number: 1
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2004 - 9:25 am: | |
Collen, I don't write in often, but I read this form a lot. I must say that I really enjoy reading your comments. You are a very inteligent writer and I agree with you almost all the time. With that out of the way, as a recent Ex-Adventist, I am starting to see the true message of the Adventist church. For many years I have heard from them "the Bible and the Bible only".
But I am now seeing that this was merely a smoke screen to hide the fact that they believe E.G White is an authority over the Word of God.
In discussion with an Adventist, they will quote bible verses and use scripture to prove their point, all the while twisting the meaning of the verse to their own understanding and totally hiding the context of the chapter.
This is to make their prophet, E.G White look as though she is God sent. I know that you are aware of these things, but maybe someone out there may not be. The Bible, the Word of God, sharper then any two edge sword is what took me from Adventistism to being saved my the grace of our Holy God and Savior. I praise the Lord for helping me see that the Bible is the truth and the only truth, which He did by merely putting in me the need to read it. Now I wish to help others see that and I thank God for this site and for sisters like you. I love the people of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and I pray for them constanly, I hope that the Lord will guide more of them to read their bibles without the churches guidence and ask the Lord to open their eyes to the truth like I did.
I'm sorry that this is so long, but I am excited at my new life in Jesus Christ. I can't help it. |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 356
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2004 - 10:16 am: | |
Patrick, thank you sharing your obvious joy in Jesus. You're absolutely right; it is the Bible that reveals error , teaches truth, and reveals Jesus. I really believe that no one ever "just decides" to read the Bible, figure out what it means, and comes up with truth. It is completely a miracle of God and the work of the Holy Spirit when a person surrenders to the authority of the Scriptures as God's word and allows Him to teach him truth from its "ancient words".
Colleen |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 371
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2004 - 10:19 am: | |
B has a lot of double speak about the bible. In some respects, it's the word of God, in other respects, some scripture is more valid than others. Consistently, the Old Testament is supreme...he says it is the scripture Paul was referring to, not his letters and not other new testament letters. He thinks that "who" is talking also qualifies scripture. So, if it's God (as in the 10 Cs), it is highest; if Jesus said it, it's kindof next in line, then the prophets, then the apostles are sort of optional as long as it supports old testament teachings. To the extent it is different, he says it is cultural or for that time period only. Now, he would never admit to such a black and white description, but as I've listened to his explanation of passages through the years, that's how it boils out. He will do anything to keep the beliefs he has in tact. He has told me he has no interest in the historic Christian faith ... so, how the passages have always been taught from history doesn't matter to him. And he also thinks there are other ways to be saved, and points to the passage in Romans 1-3 that talks about nature proving there is God. He thinks knowing Christ's name is irrelevant and believes people can be saved by keeping the law. And though he will say the relationship with Christ is important, he will run to James to say you have to have works to be saved. He can't recognize that James was written to believers, not non-Christians. Everything fluxes to support his preconceived beliefs. Doesn't that make your head swim? |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 359
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2004 - 10:39 am: | |
Yes, Melissa, it does, but unfortunately, B represents most Adventists. It's definitely crazy-making. Absolute truth, to an Adventist, is Adventism. All other Truth, they believe, leads one to Adventism. They will say Truth is Jesus, but to Adventists that claim diminishes truth instead of elevating it to something that speaks to our entire experience and existence. It's twisted and, well, evil.
Praise God for revealing Himself in spite of ourselves!
Colleen |
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2
Post Number: 654
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2004 - 2:43 pm: | |
Occassionally various SDA's will want to have what they call a Bible discussion with me. It doesn't even get as far as a real Bible discussion because I have learned over the years through trial and error to tell then that before we can even get started on a Bible discussion we have to set down some basic rules. After I tell tell them my basic rules the SDA'
s are no longer interested in having a Bible discussion with me. Here are my rules-We have the Strong's concordance handy to refer to. We have a Bible dictionary of words and terms handy to refer to. We look at the O.T. as only in reference pointing towards the N.T. N.T. teachings always are the final statement on any topic. And, Jesus in His teachings and his life, death and resurrection and take promnance over all else. After I finish giving my rules for discussion the SDA's don't want to bother. And for good reason. Patrick, it's nice to meet you and I look forward to your posts. Melissa, B. sounds just like my SDA kin. That is how come I had to come up with some discussion rules. |
Tealeaves
Registered user
Username: Tealeaves
Post Number: 61
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2004 - 6:00 pm: | |
There are so many liberal SDAs that have so many different beliefs that this is a hard topic to adequately discuss.
I went to a "liberal" SDA college. The theology professors were really getting a rough time wheile I was there for "teaching heresy". In fact, there were some attempts (some successful, some failed) to "houseclean" the theology department by getting rid of a bunch of the theo profs.
I hadn't known anything about Adventism before college, so they gave me pretty much my first glimpse at SDA theology. And one thing I discovered was that they ALL had pretty different ideas! they taught what historic SDAism teaches, what liberals believe, and what conservatives believe.
They also taught students what "mainstream Cristianity" teaches, as a basis for comparison. (which is what they were mostly "catching heck" for, I think. )
The rule seemed to be that NOTHING was sacred. Some believed in the Bible as viewed by EGW, some tossed out EGW as "sadly mistaken" but not much better than the biblical writers. One thing I noticed was that I never ran into a theologically educated SDA who believed 100% in the Bible as the inspired and infallible, straightforward Word of God, while discounting EGW, and still could call themselves SDA.
~ Some CLAIMED to believe the Bible 100%, but didn't see it as straightforward truth, instead believed it was shrouded in confusing symbolism. (this makes perfect sense as what an SDA would be taught, otherwise, how could the inconsistencies between SDA doctrine and the Bible be explained? "Basically, if you don't believe the doctrines, then you just don't get it, you aren't smart enough, or you arent paying enough attention, or you don't have enough faith")
It seems that many liberal SDAs open up the access to the plan of salvation to people who are not CHristian, but "really really good, or moral." They believe other CHristians will be saved, but more or less it will be under the "ignorance" clause. ("If they don't know the "truth" about the sabbath, then how could we expect them to be accountable for it?")
Others even think that mainstream Christianity definitely offers a form of the plan of salvation, but that mainstream CHristians will be delivered to heaven in the metaphorical "coach" seats, while the SDAs will be delivered to heaven in the "first class" section, like the "cherry on top."
Basically, however, if you take the SDA doctrines to their logical end, only the SDAs DESERVE to be saved. And their beliefs, however liberal, always end up taking credit and power AWAY from Christ as our sole salvation. ~ and that just isn't biblically acceptable! |
Chris
Registered user
Username: Chris
Post Number: 354
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2004 - 7:10 pm: | |
Loneviking, I believe you mean "Arminianism". "Arianism" is the belief that Christ is not God or some sort of lesser deity.
Chris |
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady
Post Number: 197
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2004 - 9:58 pm: | |
Patrickfoy, welcome to the FAF. Like you I am new out of SDAism. I also agree about the smoke screen of the Bible and Bible only vs EGW.
The further I get from SDAism, and the more I read the Bible with an open mind and not to prove anything, the more convoluted, suble and sly the doctrine of the SDA church is.
This morning I was reading from the book of John.
I read it earlier this year, but what stood out this morning is John 16:27 "for the Father Himself loves you, since you have loved Me and have believed that I came from the Father".
The other text is John 17:3 "And this is eternal life, to know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent".
The Father loves us. When I say that, I say in the next breath, with all my faults and He still loves me.
And to think eternal life is to know the only true God and Jesus Christ.
I never learned that in all my SDA schooling and going to church all those many years.
Thank God for Jesus and thank you for eternal life. You are truly an awesome God.
Diana |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 364
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 07, 2004 - 10:36 am: | |
Tanya, you summed up the confusion in Adventist thinking really well. The bottom line is that none of them believe the Bible is to be be taken as it stands without their own editing or interpretation. Because of their confusion re: EGW's inspiration, they carry that same confusion into their analysis of Biblical inspiration. They simply have no ground of truth on which to base their theology or their faith.
Diana, what you say is so true, and its reality is so profound: the farther away from Adventism I get, the more I am able to read the Bible with openness, and the more subtle, sly, and convoluted Adventism is revealed to be.
Our older son is leaving today for a short-term mission trip to Romania. Richard talked to some SDA kin recently about the fact that Roy is raising funds for the trip, and the answer was they couldn't give anything because he and his group would not be teaching the "whole gospel". Sigh...
By the way, Roy will be gone for two weeks, and I'd like to ask your prayers for him and the team. They're going to conduct a camp for children of local church members and also children from some orphanages; they're expecting about 75 kids. Roy is leading worship and is also leading some small groups.
I'm so grateful to God for revealing Himself to us through Jesus and for giving us the Holy Spirit to teach us!
Colleen |
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady
Post Number: 199
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 07, 2004 - 12:48 pm: | |
Colleen,
I will add your son to my prayer list while he is gone. It is so nice to see young people enthusiastic for God.
Diana |
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2
Post Number: 657
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 07, 2004 - 5:39 pm: | |
What language do they speek in Romaina? Does Roy speek the language? |
Ladylittle
Registered user
Username: Ladylittle
Post Number: 19
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 07, 2004 - 7:16 pm: | |
They speak Romainian, but I understand there is usually someone available who can translate back and forth from english.
Does Roy speak Romainian? I'm interested too!
Mary
|
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 370
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 07, 2004 - 11:17 pm: | |
No, he doesn't--none of the mission team does. There is a missionary couple there, however, that our church sponsors. He is native Romanian, and she is an American. Roy did take a tape of some worship songs sung locally by a woman who knew Romanian, however. There are translators there, and all the children are being taught English. Roy said the word is that the older children help the younger children and act as at least partial translators.
My mom (whose first language was Romanian) gave Roy a book of necessary Romanian phrases. I've no idea how much he will or won't use it!
Colleen |
Debandhenry
Registered user
Username: Debandhenry
Post Number: 16
Registered: 6-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, July 29, 2004 - 11:00 am: | |
Greeting to you all and God Bless you,
We all have our ins and outs with the SDA Church and the nightmares of trying to learn the truth that was white-washed in front of our eyes.
We had to get rid of a couple of bibles due to the notes of refrence to EGW books etc. all through them. And then I bought a new Bible!
One of the first things I did was to skim through the InDepth Articles Section and it is so refreshing to read the clear Word and see it for the message that the Word is meant to relay.
Now for the rest of the story as Paul Harvey would say. The new Bible is "The Nelson Study Bible" NKJV, Nelsons Complete Study System. Like Susan_2 I use the Strongs Concordance, the big one for Bible Study and this new Bible has that already in there.....yepee! Anyway the very first InDepth Article I went to was "Faith and Works" which we all know why. This really brought into light salvation through faith as I was taught many years ago b/4 coming into the SDA Church.
And this is what is in the article:
Faith and Works are not enemies. TRUE FAITH and RIGHTEOUS WORKS go hand in hand. They are two parts of God's work in us. Faith brings a person to salvation, and works brings that peron to faithfulness. Faith is the cause; works are the effect. You cannot sever the effect from the cause. Just as an apple tree will bear apples, so faith will produce good works (see Luke 6:43,44).
This is on page 2107 for those of you with this Bible.
The SDAs we know somehow get these so confused and then they confuse anyone who is trying to see this clearly.
Maybe we were the only ones who had this happen to them but, I think not.
To me it appears they (and us too b/4 we left)are so caught up in obeying all the rules and reading all the proper books to understand what they have been told and taught, that they forget the "Jesus" whom saves each of us from ourselves, and total destruction.
Just thought someone here might have had the same or simular experience as we had.
We will keep your son in prayer for safety Colleen and success in the work he is about to engage in for the Lord.
Deb  |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 487
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 29, 2004 - 11:09 am: | |
Yes, Deb, the whole faith/works thing has turned around 180 degrees for me. Wow, works are part of God's work in me--not for my perfection and justification, though! They're for His glory!
Thanks for your prayers for Roy. His trip was wonderful; he said worship was really moving, and he loved the 5th and 6th grade boys he had in his small group. He played a lot of games with them, and the time was meaningful and bonding.
Colleen |
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady
Post Number: 336
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, July 29, 2004 - 4:56 pm: | |
It is soooo good to hear of teenagers serving God and enjoying it. That is something one does not see very often in the SDA church.
Colleen, is your son home yet? If not, when does he return?
Diana |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 491
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 10:36 am: | |
He's home; he came home last week--and then went to Mexico for a weekend trip to build houses with his college group. But he's back in the saddle now, registered for next fall, and working...
Thanks for asking!
Colleen |
|
