| Author |
Message |
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2
Post Number: 981
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 05, 2004 - 9:27 am: |     |
So you have family in Modesto. That's interesting. I grew up in the Fresno area. Those two ciies are only around 90 miles from each other. It's a nice area. About ADRA-my son was dissing the Catholic church recently. Finily he said something about not being able to find anything good about the Catholic church. I told him I have a great respect for Catholic Social Services. He said something about how he cannot have any respect for Catholic Social Services because they take tax money for their services and programs and he thinks church and state should be seperate and tax money should not be going to these agencies. So, I asked him how come he was so pro-SDA because they sure do take a lot of tax money for ADRA. He wondered if I knew what I was talking about. I told him I did and the conversation changed. And, here's another thing that I just can't figure out so maybe someone can explain it to me because it seems inconsistant (Then what else is new? We're discussing th SDA church). The SDA colleges take tax grant money. The SDA hospitals take tax grant money. The individual students who attend SDA colleges can get the G.I. Bill, the Pell Grant, this grant and that grant and the federal college low-interest guarenteed student loans and other monies. So, how come the SDA church is so against school vouchers for the little kids? It truly shows no logic. |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 765
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 05, 2004 - 11:40 am: | |
Loren, we're glad to have you among us as we continue to grow in Jesus together. To know Him instead of the law is still so amazing to me. He actually relates to me instead of impersonally accusing me!
Your points about Adventists and government funds, Susan, is a good one. Inconsistencies abound.
Colleen |
33ad
Registered user
Username: 33ad
Post Number: 13
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 05, 2004 - 11:44 am: | |
Susan_2, maybe the church just want to break the young parents financially, and make them believe that the parents have made a 'Great Sacrifice' for their kids to go to church school. Perhaps they think the parents will 'value'(appreciate)the fact that the church is providing this important service. I don't know. They're always illogical.
Loren |
33ad
Registered user
Username: 33ad
Post Number: 14
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 05, 2004 - 12:25 pm: | |
Dd, you telling about your 'Grace' (meal prayer) being the only extent of your christian living made me remember that I truly met Jesus and gave my heart to Him at my then girlfriend's Sunday evening church. I was on fire for Him in my early 20's. Then I reasoned, "I've got Jesus AND 'THE TRUTH', so now I felt I was a fulfilled adventist. I'm afraid the Lord made me bump my head many times in the intervening years, until this year God plainly spoke to me when I was questioning whether or not I should join my new church home. He said to me out loud "Don't think you know everything. You may know the Bible, but you still have a lot to learn!" That was when I truly allowed my mind to be opened to the leading of the Holy Spirit, and then I stepped into the Light. It's amazing, one grows up being SDA but you don't really know your Savior. Even though I had been saved at Sunday church many years ago and had a 'form of Godliness' I was still denying it's power to work in me. Don't we serve a wonderfully patient God!
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, Have mercy on me, a sinner.
Loren |
Chris
Registered user
Username: Chris
Post Number: 416
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 05, 2004 - 6:06 pm: | |
33ad, I assume you belong to an Eastern Orthodox congregation. Just curious, of the Greek Orthodox or Russian Orthodox variety? (I'm guessing Russian Orthodox)
Chris |
33ad
Registered user
Username: 33ad
Post Number: 18
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 05, 2004 - 10:56 pm: | |
Hi Chris,
Right on the button!(I have to pray to suppress my pride when I see those golden domes gleaming in the morning) As I said, it was a steep learning curve.
God bless you all
Loren |
33ad
Registered user
Username: 33ad
Post Number: 21
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 1:01 am: | |
Dear Chris and all others on this Fourum,
Please forgive me for making such a bold and reprehensible statement as I did above. I am in this forum as a former adventist and fellow brother of the whole body of Christ, not as a member of any denomination.
Loren |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 520
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 6:55 am: | |
No offense, Loren. I'm not that familiar with the Eastern Orthodox traditions. Can you tell me about it a bit? |
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2
Post Number: 986
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 8:06 am: | |
I like going into the Orthodox churchs. They are very pretty, very ornate. I have never sat through an Orthodox service though. Recently I was given a Bible that has the Apocrapha in it. Also, besides the Apocrapha are serveral other small books. When I asked the pastor who gave me this Bible what those books are he told me they are used by the Orthodox religions. Cn you tell me about that? |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 50
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 10:47 am: | |
Loren. No reason for apology! I think we all rejoice when a former finds a new home where they can joyfully grow in Christ! |
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady
Post Number: 627
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 5:08 pm: | |
Loren,
No reason for an apology from me either. I am so happy that a former has found a place where God is worshipped with no extra Biblical teaching, rules and regulations. Just Jesus and nothing else. I pray each of us here continues to walk with Christ every day and grow in Him.
He is awesome.
Diana |
Hoytster
Registered user
Username: Hoytster
Post Number: 110
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 6:38 pm: | |
The Apocrypha defined:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Apocrypha
As was explained to me by a very well-versed Catholic in my (Methodist) Bible study:
Part of the Protestant Reformation included a revision of the Bible to exclude those books which were pre-Christ and not found in Hebrew. The thinking was, apparently, was that the books were not authentic if there was no Hebrew version, as there was with the rest of the Old Testament (someone correct me if I'm wrong).
My Catholic friend also told me that in this century, the Apocrypha were found among the Dead Sea scrolls, in Hebrew, so that they should be included in the Protestant Bible, under the Protestant's rule.
We dipped into them briefly during my Bible study. I remember that some of it was beautifully written.
HTH - Hoytster |
33ad
Registered user
Username: 33ad
Post Number: 24
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 3:48 am: | |
Hi,
Thank you all for being so gracious. Yes, I would answer any questions gladly. But there is so much to tell:-)
1)The Apocrypha , also called the "deuterocanonical" books was a set of books, including Maccabees 1,2 & 3 that were in the Greek translation of the Old Testament called the Septuagint,(AKA the LXX) used by the apostles and early Christians. They used this translation, which was begun in Alexandria, Egypt, in the third century BC. Although there was some initial debate over these books, they were eventually received by Christians into the Old Testament canon. In reaction to the rise of Christianity, the Jews narrowed their canons and eventually excluded the deuterocanonical books-although they still regarded them as sacred. The modern Jewish canon was not rigidly fixed until the third century AD. Interestingly, it is this later version of the Jewish canon of the Old Testament, rather than the canon of early Christianity, that is followed by most modern Protestants today. When the Apostles lived and wrote, there was no New Testament and no finalized Old Testament. The concept of "Scripture" was much less well-defined than most modern Christians imagine.
2)History: The Orthodox Church is the church that started at Pentecost. James was the first leader of this church in Jerusalem, but as each of the Apostles went on missionary journeys the church spread quite rapidly in the 1st century. As each local congregation of the church was established, the apostle that had raised that company laid hands on and appointed Bishops and Deacons to oversee the new church. There was no centralized authority, but each Bishop recognized the authority of the other in their own territory (Diocese). As time progressed into the second century, there were 5 main Bishops, at Alexandria, Jerusalem, Rome, Antioch and Constantinople. No one Bishop was above another, they were all accepted as equal. The Church came to be called 'catholic', meaning 'Universal'. There was only ONE Christian church. The early church came under attack by the Devil of course, and many heretical ideas and movements emerged (I won't go into detail here, but will give you links to check them out) To counter this, the universal church called together "Ecumenical Councils", ecumenical in the sense that the whole of Christiandom was involved. The First Council was held in Nicea, Asia Minor, in 325 to counter the heresy of Arius (Arianism).Six more councils followed in 381,431,451,553,680 & 783 AD The final Canon of the Christian Bible was only ratified by the church in AD 397 at a Council in Carthage.(There's a lot to the choosing of the books that would surprise you) BTW the end-time 'Millenium' doctrine had already been rejected as heresy by the whole christian Church at the 2nd council. Sometime in the 8th century, the Bishop of Rome tried to force his opinions on the rest of the church, but these were rejected. Relations between Rome and the Eastern Churches deteriorated and the Bishop of Rome allowed in more heresy, which was not accepted in the east. Finally, in 1054 AD the Bishop of Rome and the Eastern Churches excommunicated each other. The rest in the west is well known history, while the Eastern Church continued to quietly preserve the original doctrines to this day.
2) Beliefs: I can do no better than to quote you the CREED, which was formulated as the baptsimal vows at the the 1st & 2nd councils.
I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages; God of God, Light of Light, True God of True God; begotten, not made, being of one essence with the Father, by whom all things were made.
Who, for us human beings and for our salvation, came from the heavens, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and became man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered death and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.
And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.
And I believe in one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the age to come. Amen.
This has been a long post, but I've barely scratched the surface.
For more on Orthodoxy visit: fatheralexander.org or oca.org or http://agreen.net/church_history/c_history.html
Any one may ask me questions at: just4u@metroweb.co.za
Thanks for the interest
God Bless you all
Loren |
Doc
Registered user
Username: Doc
Post Number: 115
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 6:22 am: | |
Just on the subject of the Great Controversy, which is the title of this thread:
I have this friend who is a teacher at the same Bible college and also a pastor in Budapest. We have known each other for over twenty years. He is called Gy–rgy (George). He is also involved in lots of outreach work, including childrenís work. He mentioned someone has approached him as he wants to help with the childrenís mission, but he is an Adventist, and George is unsure about having him work for him, so he asked me to talk to him ñ more about that on the prayer request thread.
Anyway, George is aware Adventism is cultic and deceptive, and is wary of working with them, as he has had problems before. He even had me give a talk on them in his church. So I was staying at his house last week, and he was writing a study on the Waldensians, and he was reading the Great Controversy. I asked him why, and he said it was for the church history, the book was fine if you ignored the bits about the Sabbath. I told him I considered the book unreliable historically, and told him a bit about how EGW got hold of and manipulated her material, and he had no idea. I also asked him if he had read the second half of the book, starting with the Millerite movement and he said no. So I suggested he read it and thought about it before using GC as a reliable historical source. He probably wonít because heís too busy.
The Bible college where I teach is Pentecostal, but not all the students and staff belong to that denomination, which is fine. But one of the teachers is SDA, he teaches church history, and he also uses EGW books for that, and no-one seems to think there is anything wrong with it. Still, as I teach systematic theology, I often present the students with various alternative views, but they always ask me what I think, so I tell íem.
So I told Gyula about George and this Adventist, and he said, why does he not want to work with Adventists, they are such nice people. Gyula does not now believe Adventist doctrine, and is well aware of how anti-gospel it is, so all I can say is, I really do not understand the clouded thinking of Christians in this country.
Another thing, I donít know if it was on this thread, but someone mentioned the SDA argument, that Jesus kept the Sabbath, so we have to. Quite apart from the fact that the Bible indicates Jesus broke the Sabbath and constantly got into conflicts over it (e.g. John 5: 18; 9: 16), Jesus also proclaimed the gospel of the kingdom, taught with authority, healed the sick, raised the dead, cast out demons, and then sent his disciples out to do the same. He later died on a cross. Maybe the next time someone uses this argument, one could suggest following Jesusí example in one or two of these other things.
OK, sorry, I needed a rant, as I have had a few ìI donít believe itî moments this week. And who do I have to rant to on this subject, other than you good people?
Thanks,
Adrian
|
33ad
Registered user
Username: 33ad
Post Number: 25
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 6:23 am: | |
More on Orthodoxy:
Q. Why are there Greek Ort, Russian Ort. Serbian Orth. etc?
A. All Orthodox Churches believe the same and the Liturgies (Services) differ only very slightly. They are known as "Autocephelous", meaning that the Patriarch in that country has the jurisdiction over that country's Church.
Q. Why are there so many different groups?
A. Quite simply, the gospel went into the world, and each territory had the Bible and Services in their own languages. (When the Russian Missionaries went into Alaska in the early 19th century, they translated the Bible into the local Inuit Languages for the first time.) This of course worked very well in the home countries, but when they started to immigrate to the new world (Americas, Australia and Africa) the different ethnic groups tended to stay together, and imported priests from the old country to serve them. This problem has been compounded by the ex Soviet Rule in Russia, which caused a breakaway from the Russian Mother Church, and the (ROCOR) Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, came about. Since the fall of communism there are moves afoot to reunite. Another problem with the churches in the new world, is that English has crept in to each church, and now Bilingual services are held, or in English only. When Alaska became part of the USA, an American Home Church was born, leading to the final organization of the Autocepalous Orthodox Church of America (OCA).Theoretically, all Orthodox in America should report to the Patriarch of the OCA, but the ethnic ties remain. In South Africa, when the Russian Orthodox Church was building their church in Johannesburg, they decided to consult with the Patriarch of Alexandria (Who has the responsibility for all Africa) An agreement was made that the Local Russian Church would recognize the authority of the Alexandria Patriarch, while the priest still takes instruction from Moscow.
Q. What is the view of Orthodoxy on Ecumenism?
A. Some of the Ethnic Churches are members of the World Council of Churches, but not all. Although Orthodoxy would like to see unity in Christendom, they will not do so at the expense of Compromising their beliefs. Rome is closer to Orthodoxy than Protestantism, but even there, Rome expects Orthodoxy to accept the Vatican rulings, while Orthodoxy will not accept the Infallibility of the Pope, the Immaculate Conception, Original Sin, etc. So from the viewpoint of Orthodoxy, Rome would have to "Come back to the roots" before they would be accepted in fellowship. That is highly unlikely to happen. If it does, then SDA's would have to look for a new Anti-Christ:-)To close, the word Orthodox means - Sound in opinion or doctrine. That's the way Jesus wanted us to be.
I hope I haven't bored you or wasted your time. I've just been trying to answer some of the questions you raised in the most concise way.
God Bless
Loren |
33ad
Registered user
Username: 33ad
Post Number: 26
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 6:28 am: | |
Doc
You can rant in my face any day:-O
Loren |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 779
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 8:51 am: | |
Adrian, I completely understand your frustration. And as far as using the Great Controversy for historical commentary goes, she really reports history in an Adventist-skewed fashion.
While the Waldenses were definitely persecuted, we did not know until we read after leaving the church that they held some heretical views and were not necessarily God's guarded, carefully preserved true believers who eventually became the spiritual fathers of Adventism as EGW painted them to be.
I'm convinced that many of EGW's comments sound plausible for two reasons: 1) she copied from articualte sources, and 2) she had help from a false spirit who knows the plans Satan has and gave hints of them to her. The trouble is she didn't write from God's perspective. That detail skews everything!
Colleen |
Madelia
Registered user
Username: Madelia
Post Number: 89
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 10:26 am: | |
Loren,
I'm getting caught up with the posts from the past week and also want to say "welcome" to the forum!
Your information on the orthodox church is very interesting. One of my friends in college was Greek Orthodox. I remember she and her family celebrated Christmas and Easter a week after we did. But that's about all I knew about the church.
This just brought to mind one of John Carter's tapes my husband plays. Carter was planning a crusade in Russia and according to him met a lot of resistance from the Orthodox church. One of the bishops (or higher church officials) said "you'll have your meeting here over my dead body" and the next day the biship died. (At least that's Carter's side of the story!!) Carter's tone is always very sarcastic and derogatory; I just grind my teeth and try to get out of earshot of the TV! |
33ad
Registered user
Username: 33ad
Post Number: 29
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 11:12 am: | |
Hi Madelia,
The Orthodox church follows the Julian Calender and not the Gregorian (From Pope Gregory) institued in the west. This is a bit of a hassle, as the Orthodox dates are always 13 days behind the Western calender. So Orthodox Christmas is on January 7. I have to take vacation leave off work to attend the celebration. Also, easter is called "Pasha" in orthodox churches, and due to Jewish Passover and Full moon after eqinox, Orthodox Pasha coinsides with western easter only in leapyears. this year Pasha was the same as western Easter.
God Bless
Loren |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 11
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 11:33 am: | |
A couple more things about The Great Controversy:
Ellen G. White did not use the most reliable historical sources, when she plagiarized the material for The Great Controversy. There are many things which are historically inaccurate.
Also, she promotes the Albigenses, who believed that Jesus wasn't really human, that the God of the Old Testament was the "evil god," etc. The Bible calls them antichrists; EGW says they preserved the true faith!
Jeremy |
33ad
Registered user
Username: 33ad
Post Number: 30
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 11:56 am: | |
Quite right Jeremy, I was just reading about that last week too. As a lifelong SDA (Now a former) I must confess I only ever read "Steps To Christ", The last half of the GC and The DA. According to ellenwhite.org, "Steps" was authored by Fannie Bolton, one of EGW's assistants. If one reads the words to the hymn "Not I But Christ",(Which Fannie Bolton also wrote) one can believe it. It was the only book worth reading, and is relevant to any christian. Pity it has EGW's name on the cover. All the others are only worth pulping;-)
Loren |
Susan_2
Registered user
Username: Susan_2
Post Number: 993
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 1:25 pm: | |
Colleen, What yousaid about a false spirit is interesting. Were you aware if you use the western alphabet and assign Roman values (as in Roan nuerals) the words, Ellen Gould White equals 666. Frankly, I don't think this is coincindental. I think it is a God warning. |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 16
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 3:02 pm: | |
Yep, Ellen Gould White adds up to 666. Here's how it adds up to 666 (I have this on a Word document):
E = 0
L = 50
L = 50
E = 0
N = 0
Ellen: 50 + 50 = 100
G = 0
O = 0
U = 5
L = 50
D = 500
Gould: 5 + 50 + 500 = 555
W = 5 + 5
H = 0
I = 1
T = 0
E = 0
White: 5 + 5 + 1 = 11
Ellen Gould White: 100 + 555 + 11 = 666
Ellen Gould White = 666 |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 1504
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 02, 2006 - 6:01 pm: | |
8. The Great Controversy:
All humanity is now involved in a great controversy between Christ and Satan regarding the character of God, His law, and His sovereignty over the universe. This conflict originated in heaven when a created being, endowed with freedom of choice, in self-exaltation became Satan, God's adversary, and led into rebellion a portion of the angels. He introduced the spirit of rebellion into this world when he led Adam and Eve into sin. This human sin resulted in the distortion of the image of God in humanity, the disordering of the created world, and its eventual devastation at the time of the worldwide flood. Observed by the whole creation, this world became the arena of the universal conflict, out of which the God of love will ultimately be vindicated. To assist His people in this controversy, Christ sends the Holy Spirit and the loyal angels to guide, protect, and sustain them in the way of salvation.
---------
I was skimming through the official beliefs and was struck as I read this one again....
The last line:
To assist His people in this controversy, Christ sends the Holy Spirit and the loyal angels to guide, protect, and sustain them in the way of salvation.
Does it not sound like the "Holy Spirit and loyal angels" have the same job, somehow the same level? |
Helovesme2
Registered user
Username: Helovesme2
Post Number: 686
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, November 02, 2006 - 6:29 pm: | |
 Yes it does sound that way Melissa! |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 1589
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, November 02, 2006 - 6:48 pm: | |
Melissa, you're right--I hadn't noticed that blasphemous part before, but I have thought about how blasphemous it is to say that the angels help save us (which comes from EGW, by the way)!!!
I didn't know that we were supposed to trust in the angels to save us!!!
And this is actually in their "Fundamental Beliefs," for the public to see!
Jeremy |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 4901
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 03, 2006 - 10:44 am: | |
Melissa, I never noticed that, either! You're rightóthe angels and the Holy Spirit are right there together. The closer the scrutiny, the more evil the structure of this religion is.
Colleen |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 1507
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 7:34 pm: | |
Reading again off their website:
"About Us
Adventists believe a Trinity of three persons - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit - make up one God. They made salvation possible when Jesus, the Son, came to earth as a baby in Bethlehem and lived a sinless life in accordance with the Fatherís will. When Jesus was crucified for the sins of the people of the world and arose from the dead on the third day, victory was won for everyone.
When He returned to heaven following the resurrection, Jesus left the Holy Spirit to serve as our Comforter and Counselor. He promised to return to earth a second time to complete His plan of salvation and take His people to heaven. Adventists are among the believers who look forward to that day.
Adventists believe that God is concerned with the quality of human life, and that everything - the way we live, eat, speak, think, treat each other, and care for the world around us - is part of His plan. Our families, our children, our jobs, our talents, our money, and our time are all important to Him."
Notice in the 2nd paragraph that the 2nd coming "completes" the plan of salvation. In paragraph 1, it says the victory is won, but it's not complete until the second coming. Is that what that's saying? |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 4921
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 8:31 pm: | |
Yes, MelissaóAdventists teach that the new covenant is actually instituted after the second coming. They do not believe it has NOW replaced the old.
Colleen |
|
