Archive through November 06, 2004 Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Former Adventist Fellowship Forum » ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS 3 » Is There An Excuse? » Archive through November 06, 2004 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Dd
Registered user
Username: Dd

Post Number: 184
Registered: 7-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 10:38 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

What I hate about CARM is the difficulty I have in figuring out how to use it. I am a computer idiot. I have had very little difficulty figuring out how to read FAF posts and how to post myself. If I have had difficulty, it has been pretty easy to figure out when I spend a little time. I have never been able to get anywhere on CARM. I would love to read posts there. You are free to use this very post to explain why they do not have my voice on their site.
Raven
Registered user
Username: Raven

Post Number: 88
Registered: 7-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 10:46 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

We still can't get on CARM from our home computer, and I have heard of several other people who have the very same problem, and they're not even in our area. We had our ISP look into it, and I think the way they explained it was that for some reason, CARM is blocking certain ISP addresses. If that's not exactly right, I know they said there is a block and that the problem is on CARM's end. CARM hasn't responded to that explanation, but initially they said they had not heard of any one having that problem. In the meantime, my husband has been accessing CARM from his work internet connection, because it's a different ISP.
Tdf
Registered user
Username: Tdf

Post Number: 4
Registered: 11-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 10:50 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I've been away from my computer for some time, so I'm returning to a topic discussed earlier in this thread. Colleen, I appreciate your comments of 11/4/04, and I wanted to add that, to this very day, there is much division within the membership of the Adventist church and that this division is directly related to some of the issues discussed on this site. Although there are many, many "historic Adventists" who have dug in their heels with respect to certain "truths" that many of us have now abandoned (i.e. Ellen White is a prophet, salvation=faith+works, we must stand before a Holy God without a mediator at the end of time, we must reach a state of sinlessness in our own efforts in order to be saved, etc., etc., etc.), there are "progressive Adventists" who have abandoned these teachings and who are boldly proclaiming the good news that salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone in Christ alone and it appears that there are many Adventists who are daily involved in a saving relationship with Jesus Christ.

My wife and I are learning new things every day and we are beginning to pray about our church membership. However, we sense that, although one can easily make statements regarding the error of the Adventist church as an organization, it is difficult to make generalizations when referring to individual Adventists, because individual Adventists differ greatly in their beliefs.
Hrobinsonw
Registered user
Username: Hrobinsonw

Post Number: 79
Registered: 7-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 11:14 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Tdf,

Thank you for responding as I am searching for an answer to some things. Would it then become an issue of the effect that being Adventist would have on a witness.

(Romans 14:20-23: 20 Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. 21 It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble. [3] 22 The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. 23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.)

Let say that as a "progressive adventist" you practice grace. But you still tithe worship SDA because in your heart you are correct and right with God. Then you have people amongst you that have questions, or are searching for truth. Most of the time words don't carry the impact that action would. Wouldn't those "progressive adventists" be causing other Adventists to stumble. I mean, if the core of the SDA church, meaning Conference officials, high ranking SDA administrators is supported by Miller, Bates, EGW, etc. To the eyes of an inquiring SDA individual, the "progressive" approach may not be very beneficial because maybe the tithing and service all work to support the SDA church which stands on Miller, Bates, EGW. And an able witness would take note of ones action, and in an essence, stumble. They may think that it is alright to continue on.

Oh, and one more question. Is there ever a point where people become held accountable for their lack of knowledge or accpetance of knowledge. When you are a child you are taught only what your parent's allow to enter your head from a spiritual sense. If that teaching is a little off, and as an adult you follow that teaching. Is there something wrong with saying as an adult, "well God isn't going to punish me for what I don't know, so I will keep on doing what I was raised to do, eventhough people say that it is wrong?" Just a whole lot of questions that I had because my discussions of late have been interesting to say the least.
Krista
Registered user
Username: Krista

Post Number: 36
Registered: 8-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 11:17 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hrobinsonw, I just had to respond to your post. My feeling is that there is something special about the legal marriage ceremony that is spiritual too. I actually know of two different couples who did have sex when they were engaged, then felt it was wrong because they weren't completely committed, so they stopped and asked forgiveness... when they did get married, this made their marriage quite special. It's not an easy decision, no doubt, but they both felt it was worth the wait! Just something to think about (sorry, hope this didn't sound too old fashioned, lol)
Mitsy
Registered user
Username: Mitsy

Post Number: 16
Registered: 11-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 11:46 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

For what it's worth ...now how did we get on the subject of sex here?????

Anyway, I think the idea of waiting until marriage is admirable, but the biggest majority of people (Christian or not) usually do not wait. However, this is another way to look at it. I think it is important for the couple to be on the same page as far as sexual issues go. I've heard of some instances where the couple waited for marriage and after a number of years of marriage were still quite resentful that their spouse had certain ideas about sex (I won't go into details here). Let's just say that their sex life was not fulfilling. I think when people get to be in their 30's and 40's that they don't owe anyone an explanation of their sex life (or lack thereof). If a couple is living together, then they have to take or ignore some critics who speak out about their living arrangements. I personally don't think you have to live together in order to get to know each other, but I do think you need to know your future husband/wife well enough (physically as well as emotionally) in order to know what you'll be getting after marriage. I actually believe in the "don't ask, don't tell" theory. Let people think what they want of you. It's no one's business but your own.
Mitsy
Registered user
Username: Mitsy

Post Number: 17
Registered: 11-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 11:52 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Pheeki: What post of mine did you post on the other forum? Was my name used on this? I actually post on the beliefnet.com debate board and have also been blasted by the "holier than thou" Adventists there. We argue "legalism" all the time, but the board is not as active as this one and somedays I seldom ever look at it. It seems like many in legalistic, rule-infested religions dig their heels in deeper when confronted with obvious problems within their faith. The accusatory tone (like we're the devil) is quite hard to take at times.
Tdf
Registered user
Username: Tdf

Post Number: 5
Registered: 11-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 12:12 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hrob,

Thanks for your response. I'm not sure how to answer your question about being a stumbling block (nor am I sure who is causing who to stumble). This seems to be a point of individual decision for those (like my wife and me) who are facing a variety of difficult decisions and who are trying to follow God's direction in ways that will glorify Him.

My point is simply that, if you believe that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, there are some members of the SDA church who are pursuing genuine, saving relationships with Jesus Christ.

To your other point, it appears that, under the new covenant, Christ is writing his law on our hearts. Through this process, it would seem that those are honestly and humbly pursuing a relationship with Jesus Christ will follow God's direction wherever it may lead. I don't believe they are doing so out of fear that they will lose the salvation that was given to them as a free gift, but rather they do so out of their deep and sincere love for their Savior. Said another way, those who are sincerely seeking a relationship with Jesus will receive (and not refuse) direction or knowledge from God wherever and whenever they can find it. That will be a natural by-product of the relationship!
Praisegod
Registered user
Username: Praisegod

Post Number: 144
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 1:16 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

TDF, I understand the agonizing that you and your wife are going through right now. When God started removing the veil from my face, I was in a congregation with a progressive, evangelical pastor who preached the true Gospel. It would have been tempting to just accept the status quo because I could do a good work from within that particular setting. However, gradually the Holy Spirit brought me to understand the foundational issues.

For me, the issue became the integrity of having my name signed on the dotted line that I subscribed to the 27 fundamental beliefs. More and more I was finding that wasnít the case. Also, I needed to be honest and recognize the deceit and deception that was at the core of Adventism. Can anyone think of anything doctrinal where the Adventist church has admitted to being wrong? Or, even something else that isnít doctrinal? I canít because the core, the foundation built on error and arrogance is not about to be swayed in the slightest from its origins, which are unbiblical and leaders at the highest level are well aware of that fact.

Individuals, on the other hand, are close to the heart of God and all of us here and elsewhere who are praying for error to be exposed. Thank God for this forum, for the internet research available and for formers and friends who want to bring Jesus to each one who doesnít recognize the joy and freedom available outside of Adventism.

Praise GodÖ
Hrobinsonw
Registered user
Username: Hrobinsonw

Post Number: 81
Registered: 7-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 1:18 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Tdf,

I thought that you were speaking in general and I apologize. My response was in general because your statement was along the lines of something that I was wondering. I guess the question is, if an individual has a peronal relationship with Christ through grace, would that individual be a stumbling block to those that surround him/her that may or may not share those same sentiments?

And thank you for the response to my second question. It makes sense. I will pose that point in my next discussion which I am sure will be tomorrow night.
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b

Post Number: 66
Registered: 7-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 6:31 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I guess part of the question is, do we trust God to save someone EVEN IF they are within the SDA church?

On one hand, having come to an understanding of how deep and pervasive the errors are that the SDA church places between individuals and the un-meritted grace of God I am anxious to shout the news and pull everyone I know kicking and screaming out of that error and into a warm, wonderful experience of grace. And I'm frustrated when people "see" the problems of SDAism but don't see any reason why it is a problem to stay (not speaking of those who are wrestling and praying about their course of action TDF).

OTOH, I only have to look at how patiently and gently God led my wife and I. Sheep know their Shepherd's voice and it has to be His calling, not our well intentioned messages, that lead a person into freedom. Denying someone else's relationship with Christ because of their denominational affiliation seems that it denies our own experiences of God's leading.
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy

Post Number: 64
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 8:02 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Something I thought of recently: I've seen people on here say that some SDAs told them that it's ok, they can stay in the church even if they don't believe all of the 27 beliefs, etc. But something that one could tell those people is that when a person becomes a member of the SDA church, they are supposed to vow that they agree with the beliefs of the SDA church. The SDA church manual states: "Baptismal Vow Candidates for baptism or those being received into fellowship by profession of faith shall affirm their acceptance of the doctrinal beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in the presence of the church or other properly appointed body." (Church Manual, Chapter 6, page 32. http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/church_manual/chapter6.html#32)

Jeremy
Krista
Registered user
Username: Krista

Post Number: 37
Registered: 8-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 9:31 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

When I was baptized 2 years ago, I never saw those Vows, nor was I asked about them. I would not have agreed to them. Recently, when I talked to the pastor about withdrawing my membership, he said I didn't have to believe in egw to be in the church. I gave him my letter this past week, and he was very nice about it, saying he respected my convictions, and to feel free to attend anytime. Anyway, I wonder if there are lots of other churches that don't mention these vows. Anybody know?
Belvalew
Registered user
Username: Belvalew

Post Number: 49
Registered: 7-2004
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 10:48 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dear Hrobinsonw,

I will respond to your first query as best I may. I have come to trust that my salvation lies in Jesus by faith alone, through His grace alone, and I have SDA friends who are very traditional. I also have friends who are motivated by grace. My traditionalist friends are quick to point out to me that I am deluded. My friends who are motivated by grace, even though they are dedicated to SDAism and would like for me to be as well, are willing to see me as being a co-traveler with them through Christ. What that tells me is that I am a stumbling block for the traditionalist, but not for the ones who are abiding by faith.

Belva
Doc
Registered user
Username: Doc

Post Number: 164
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 11:31 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Praisegod,

On your question as to whether the SDA church has ever admitted error.
I have read that they changed their views on the Trinity sometime in the 1930s. Did they admit error then, or did they just slip it in quietly so that no one would notice?

Adrian
Praisegod
Registered user
Username: Praisegod

Post Number: 145
Registered: 3-2004
Posted on Saturday, November 06, 2004 - 4:59 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Adrian, as far as I know there was no clear-cut line of delineation. The Arian ones just rather quietly slipped away from teaching their views so prominently. The introduction to EGWís books will claim that nothing has been changed or deleted when it is often an untruth. To my knowledge, the incorrectness of their view on the Trinity has never been officially admitted or discussed. The way I always heard it explained was that it was just a private belief held by a few: Uriah Smith, Joseph Bates etc. At times people would not even acknowledge that James White also held those views.

Now, this has been MY understanding and I imagine itís somewhat different depending upon where you were raised and in what era. It is also very easy to muddy the water further by recognizing that you can pull out EGW statements pro and con. My guess is that she started understanding the Trinity better as time progressed. (I know I will get jumped on for giving her that much credit.) However, with all the compilations out there, quotes are mixed up with no regard for date so you have a total mishmash of truth and error.

Praise GodÖ
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b

Post Number: 69
Registered: 7-2004
Posted on Saturday, November 06, 2004 - 5:16 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

No jumping here. With all the books EGW was reading and copying from, it must have certainly influenced her understanding. Maybe for the better at times. Perhaps reading/copying from all those authors who did believe firmly in the Trinity helped change Ellen's views.
Sabra
Registered user
Username: Sabra

Post Number: 257
Registered: 10-2001
Posted on Saturday, November 06, 2004 - 8:51 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hrobinsonw,

Sorry to respond late. I just gotta tell you what you already know; any sex outside of marriage is against the teachings of God.

Did you know that when two people have sex they actually become one flesh? It may be too discriptive, but I heard a preacher preach on it and say that blood and sperm actually get embedded in bones and become a permanent part of the other person.

I'm not condemning you, I admire you for your honesty and I'm not perfect myself. Just get married already ok? It's not what the world would tell you but it's biblical, Paul said better to marry than burn with lust.

I agree with Colleen totally, the church I attend is very outspoken on this matter and we hold the "true love waits" classes as well with a promise ring and ceremony and all. It is very important and I didn't hear much about it in the SDA church.

Praying for you.
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2

Post Number: 1081
Registered: 11-2002
Posted on Saturday, November 06, 2004 - 3:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

All that copying must have been really tiering and also a lot of work. If EGW was alive today all she'd have to do is put a disc of the book she wanted to copy from in her computer and she could just sit at the computer and make up all the books she'd want from other peoples books. So, I guess I would give her an A+ for effort and dedication towards her tasks. There is an elderly Morman man down the street from me who is trying to get his book on health published. A lot of the book he has written is quotes by E.G. White. The difference though between him and her is that he puts her writings in quotation marks and she's listed in the footnotes after each quote.
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy

Post Number: 68
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Saturday, November 06, 2004 - 7:26 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

PraiseGod,

Actually, EGW denies the Trinity in her later writings as well.

Also, I read somewhere that the anti-Trinity doctrine was actually in their official statement of beliefs from around 1880-something to somewhere around the 1930s. And EGW never condemned it, all the way until her death; never said a word against it.

Jeremy

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