| Author | Message | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 326 Registered: 10-2004  |
This Adventist Review article I found makes me want to throw up! This is absolutely the most amazing thing I've ever read. Basically every sentence blasphemes GOD!!! I found this article on the adventistreview.org web site. The title says, "All-Powerful or All Powerful? God is omnipotent, but He voluntarily puts limits on His power. Why? by James Londis" and it's in the January 27, 2005 issue, page 24. Here is the link to it: http://www.adventistreview.org/2005-1504/story3.html I didn't read much except for the last two sections, which are the ones that talk about God and His power and our power. The last two sections of the article especially are a MUST-READ. They are called "God and Power" and "To Make Us All Powerful." Here are some excerpts:
This is total blashpemy!!! JESUS said: "For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father." (John 10:17-18 NASB.) More from the article:
So this horrible blasphemer says that we become equal with God and then we have power OVER God!!! And he says that we can eventually decide for ourselves what is or is not within the will of God--we no longer need to pray about God's will, and I guess no longer need the Bible. Well what if I "decide" the Sabbath is not God's will, is that alright with this blasphemer? And he says that God has to be GIVEN ultimate power and that if Jesus hadn't died for us He WOULDN'T DESERVE to be God!!!!! WOW!!! And just yesterday, Chris thought he had seen it all!!! Jeremy | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 313 Registered: 7-2000 |
This is just one more example of how the G.C. is dragging the SDA church back to the cultic doctrine of the SDA pioneers. | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 327 Registered: 10-2004 |
I need to add a couple more things. First of all that article completely agrees with Ellen G. White:
Also, this proves that Adventism has NO CONCEPT of God and His sovereignty and His attributes. They do not believe in the correct God, they do not have the concept of the Godhead right. People say that SDAs have the Godhead right, so they can't be a cult! But this is false. And did you know that according to the Review, etc. (I found this out the other day) the SDA church teaches that God is 3 beings? The do NOT believe in the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity. They believe in 3 gods. Jeremy | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 314 Registered: 7-2000 |
You lost me on that last part, Jeremy. God is three seperate beings acting with one purpose. What did you find that goes counter to this belief? | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 328 Registered: 10-2004 |
I believe the Bible teaches that God is one being existing as three persons. Chris did an excellent study on this awhile back. You can see that here: http://rtinker.powweb.com/discus/discus/messages/11/2346.html?1098155037 Jeremy | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 329 Registered: 10-2004 |
The doctrine of 3 beings appears to be a Mormon doctrine: http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/mormon/beliefs/god/ Almost everything on that page could describe Adventism also. Jeremy | ||
| Lindylou Registered user Username: Lindylou Post Number: 17 Registered: 1-2005 |
Interesting points to ponder, Jeremy. At first I didn't quite get what you were upset about - I had to re read the Review article several times - the typical problem with SDA theology is the way it is always couched in subtle wonderful sounding truth twisted up with error. You were very observant to catch the real gist of what the author was saying. Two lines stood out - the one that made the lightbulb click on was the statment: "it is one thing to BE God and another to DESERVE to be God." Wow! I see what you mean. The idea of God deserving to be God is crazy! This article smacks of Mormonism in my mind. A very hidden message of the SDA beliefs seems to take away the Divinity of God/Jesus. When one looks at them as three distinct beings - that has a tendancy to happen. (I had an SDA teen recently tell me that he didn't think the shedding of Jesus blood was really that important in the grand scheme of things because it was unfair of God to send his son to pay the price for mankinds sins. He wasn't seeing the fact that when Jesus came to die - it was GOD giving HIMSELF! He viewed the whole thing in terms of the "great controversy" and that Jesus came to give us a contrast between good and evil so that we could choose good!) The other statement that really bugs me is the reference to "power of persuasion through example." I am weary of the idea that Jesus is our Example. To use the teacher/student analogy in my own way - I look at it this way: Let's say that a teacher starts the year with her class saying, In order for you to get your diploma for graduating, you must follow my example and do everything that I teach you and model for you. You will then be assured of passing this course and graduating. The students response to that would be to furiously work by taking notes and doing everything the teacher wanted - if they desired to graduate. It would take alot of effort on the part of the students. But let's say that the teacher starts the year by saying: I am holding in my hand your diplomas. They already have your name written on them. They are yours because I have fulfilled all the requirements for this course for you. Just take my word for it and stick with this course and you are guaranteed to graduate. The students' responses would mostly likely be disbelief - it is too good to be true - but when it sinks in - they will be very thankful and in awe of the teacher. They will be free to learn what the teacher has to offer without the pressure of having to get the grade. I know this isn't the perfect analogy - but the bottom line is that Jesus is our Substitute - NOT our Example! | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 1459 Registered: 11-2002 |
"...and threatening His universe"? I think that is the most stupid statement in that article. It totally takes away fromthe all-powerful, Alpha and Omega, from the first to the last, from everlasting to everlasting God. | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 316 Registered: 7-2000 |
Jeremy wrote: 'I believe the Bible teaches that God is one being existing as three persons'. --------------------------------------------- Careful---you're getting real close to the language of modalism. Modalism believes in one God who can manifest in one of three 'modes'. The Hebrew word 'Elohim' is perhaps the best word for God as it implies plurality. The Trinity are three, seperate beings with their own personalities and their own work----but all together they make up the Trinity and are one in purpose. | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 624 Registered: 7-2003  |
Loneviking, what Jeremy stated is not at all close to modalism. Othodox Christianity (by biblical authority), teaches that God is one single living being that eternally co-exists as three co-equal persons (i.e. all the time simultaneously). Modalist say that God is sometimes in the mode of the Father, sometimes in the mode of the Son, then at other times in the mode of the Spirit, but never at the same time. They usually say that God was the Father before the incarnation, the Son during the incarnation, and the Spirit after the incarnation. In other words, modalist acknowledge the Biblical teaching that there is only one God, they acknowledge the Biblical teaching that the Father, Son, and Spirit are God, but then they deny the Biblical teaching that the Father, Son, and Spirit are eternally personally distinct. It is the denial of this thrid Biblical truth that makes modalism a heresy. Jeremy's statement is quite orthodox, quite Biblically correct, and not at all modalistic. Chris | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 330 Registered: 10-2004 |
I definitely do not believe in Modalism, but I also don't want to go to the other edge of Tritheism: http://www.carm.org/heresy/tritheism.htm I admit it can be hard to try to "define" the Trinity.  Jeremy | ||
| Dd Registered user Username: Dd Post Number: 334 Registered: 7-2004 |
Jeremy, I am not terribly familiar with New Age beliefs. My limited understanding made me think that the author of the Review article was dabbling in New Age (the power is within us). What do you think? | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 1362 Registered: 12-2003  |
That Reveiw Article is priceless. It completely states, out in the open, the heresy of Adventism that MUST exist in order for them to hold to their beliefs of the IJ, the spirit of man is breath, and their exalting of man's free will. Becuase of these doctrines, Jesus MUST be less than the all-powerful God. Man MUST have the final word in his own salvation. Yes, Dd, there are smacks of New Age inner power in the article, but that isn't really what the author is saying. The author is saying exactly what Adventism has always taught: that we will ultimately arrive at our own intrinsic righteousness, that we will stand without a mediator, that we get to choose how much or how little we allow God to work in our lives, that God must ultimately answer to US, to CREATION, instead of us ultimately having to answer to him. All this is traditional Adventism. Their focus on free will has made a god of the matter. Free will is the most important thing to them. And yet, we are born absolutely unable to make a free decision. We are born dead. Our spirits are disconnected from God, and we are objects of wrath (Ephesians 2:4). There's no way in the world that as natural humans we can choose God or choose life or choose anything constructive or eternal unless GOD IN HIS SOVEREIGNTY INTERVENES in our lives. Only when God intervenes and calls us are we enable to choose Him or not. Only when we choose Him are we truly free--this freedom is what we on this forum are so reveling in! And yet Paul calls this freedom being a slave to Christ. Truly, we are never completely creatures of free will. We are either dead in inherited sin and enslaved to evil and our inevitable death, or we are alive in Christ, "slaves" to eternity and joy and meaning and freedom. Adventists cannot stand the idea that God is sovereign over them because then they would be accountable to Him. As it is, Adventists quite literally teach that God is ultimately accountable to us. The reason we had so much trouble, as Adventists, feeling comfortable with Jesus, with saying His name, with loving Him, with surrendering to Him, is precisely because Adventism teaches a God who is small and weak. They do not teach a sovereign God, and they teach an even less powerful Jesus. In Adventism, Jesus is more or less a sympathetic, benign god/man who allowed us to kill him to show us how much God loved us. Nonsense!! As Jeremy quoted above, Jesus did not allow us to kill him. He laid down His own life, and His blood was essential for our salvation. His death was NOT an object lesson for us to convince us of our guilt and our need for perfection. His blood repaired the tear in the universe, sin, that separated our universe from God. Jesus is the Lord of lords and King of Kings. God is sovereign over all things, including our "free will", and he does not limit Himself so we paltry creations can have some false sense of power. Adventism is subtle and seductive and evil. It most certainly teaches another gospel and also another Jesus than the One in the Bible. And they teach all this heresy while using the same Christian vocabulary the rest of Christendom uses. They just hide their real meanings from the uninitiated. I pray that God will expose and break the spirit of Aventism, that He will release those in bondage to be able to choose him freely, and that He will show the Christian world the true nature of the SDA church. Colleen | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 199 Registered: 7-2004  |
This may never have been more evident than in the growing teaching surrounding the pre-Advent Judgment being about our lives vindicating God. The more I looked at this idea, the more disturbed I became. The "original" IJ was bad enough, teaching that we needed to become good enough to be deserving of eternal life. But the "new and improved" pre-Advent Judgment is even worse. It turns the gospel completely upside down. It teaches that our righteousness vindicates God, that our lives allow the universe to judge whether God is just. Basically it teaches that we "save" God. | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1010 Registered: 3-2004  |
I went to the web site to read the Review article. I could not stay on it as I get this dark feeling in me when I am on SDA web sites. I read enough to see the heresy being taught and I am just a beginning student of the Bible. I, too, pray that "God will expose and break the spirit of adventism, that He will release those in bondage to be able to choose Him freely, and that He will show the Christian world the true nature of the SDA church." Thank you for the words Colleen. You say things so well. I have said before and I probably will say it again, I never knew how conniving,heretical and non-Biblical the SDA church is. By that I mean how they twist a text to say what they want it to say. That is why we pray for SDAs on Friday at sundown and 1 PM on Saturday. God will prevail and He is so awesome. Diana | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 1462 Registered: 11-2002 |
",,,God is accountable to us". This reminds me of the feature article in a Sigms of the Times several years ago called, "When We Will Judge God". It was a really balsphomous article. And, Diana, I don't go to those SDA websites. They creep me out. | ||
| Tealeaves Registered user Username: Tealeaves Post Number: 203 Registered: 5-2004 |
At first the subtle twisting that results in absolute heresy and confusion in the SDA church set off alarm bells, then it made me frustrated. Then, as I learned more about it, it made me angry, then sad, at the very core of my being. Now, since I am not daily exposed to it, I don't think of it much. But whenever we talk to my husband's (SDA) family, or I hear something like this, those feelings come tumbling back. It is like there are people wandering around in a stinking haze, and they refuse to let anyone give them directions out, because they doubt everyone else's credentials. And besides, everyone else in the haze has told them that the stink is actually fragrant as a rose, and not being able to see past their own nose is completely normal. As Snoopy would say, AARRGGGHHHH! | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 333 Registered: 10-2004 |
Colleen, I have another term for the dictionary. "the state of the dead" = This is an SDA term which refers to a state of non-existence when one dies. You know what? SDA's don't believe in "the state of the dead"--they don't believe there are any dead people--they ceased to exist! (Or as the SDA book When A Man Dies puts it, "All that has comprised the man ends") How can the dead have a "state," or anything for that matter, if they don't exist?! The closest you could say would be a "state of non-existence." Jeremy | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 1470 Registered: 11-2002 |
Jeremy, I just went to the page you put together called, "EGW, Bigatroy, Discrimnation and Racism". It's AWSOME! How many pages would it be printed out on paper? | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 334 Registered: 10-2004 |
Susan, It should be somewhere around 10 pages printed out. Jeremy |
