| Author | Message | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3723 Registered: 12-2003  |
Regarding resurrection, 1 Corinthians 15 probably addresses this subject the best. It is (at best!) metaphoric and unprecise, but I think we can safely deduce that what is resurrected will be substantially different from albeit related to what went into the ground. Read 1 Corinthians 15:35-54. Paul says, essentially, that the mortal body is to a seed as the resurrection body is to the mature plant. "It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body," he says. I think it's safe to say that while the two will be related, they will not be "the same". I disagree with Chuck Smith regarding the dead receiving their resurrection bodies at death, however. 2 Cor. 5 certainly suggests that we are "unclothed" during death, but nevertheless we make it our purpose to please God whether in the body or out of it. I suspect that somehow our being "in Christ" clothes us during death. If our lives are hidden with Christ in God, and not even death can separate us from His love, then our spirits must be in Him during death while they wait for the resurrection. Colleen | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 652 Registered: 4-2000  |
Jeremy, Thanks for sharing information from the Former Christian Science website. Indeed, God calls his people from unlikely places. For example, Abraham was called out of a land where the darkness of heathenism was the norm. Truly, the love of God penetrates every human barrier. Dennis Fischer | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 168 Registered: 7-2005  |
When I say "evangelical" books, I put it in the bracket.I dont'believe that the books present the pure gospel, just only contain more "evangelical" words and expressions. | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1512 Registered: 3-2005 |
Raven, Chuck Smith's doctrine of receiving resurrected bodies at death is only one-half of his teaching. That teaching, in itself, is not heretical. But, it is quite another problem if he believes that Jesus was raised in a completely different body, than the one he was buried with. Yes, probably all the scars or cells weren't there. But classical Christian doctrine says Christ was buried, and arose in his same body. The nail prints were still there, and the wound in his side was still there. It is very serious to alter the doctrine of the resurrection in any way. Craig Hawkins is a very well respected scholar who used to substitute host for the Bible Answer man, and used to work with Walter Martin. He now teaches at different theology schools. He is a man of great integrity, and doesn't say things off the cuff. He was publicly taken to task 13 years ago, when he dared criticize Chuck Smith over this very issue of the resurrection. Chuck Smith is idolized here in S.Cal as a man who can do no wrong. It is clearly a cult of personality. Many of the Calvary Chapel preachers are very charismatic, and the people who go there believe everything Chuck Smith tells them as if it is fact. Last night, I called radio station KKLA 99.5 FM, and, since I had heard rumors that Chuck Smith was teaching a heretical view of Christ's resurrection, then I decided to ask Craig Hawkins what the story was. He indeed confirmes that Chuck Smith does teach a heretical view of the resurrection of Christ. He related how he, (Hawkins) almost got kicked off another radio station for saying this. That is because of the god-like adoration people have for Chuck Smith. But, it is not Biblical to say that Christ rose from the dead in a different body. Other cults have taught similar doctrine, but because he is Chuck Smith, he can get away with it. Also Chuck Smith is very sensitive to criticism, and will not address this issue when other Christian brothers have tried to discuss this with him. He will not be accountable on this. I posted this before in the archived section of this thread, but you can hear the live conversation I had with Craig Hawkins regarding Chuck's views of the resurrection at www.livebyword.org Jeremy, Thanks for all your resources. I will try to hear Tim Oliver's tape on SDA. That does sound very interesting. However, it seems that there is a tacit admission on his part, if he believes it is possible to be a Christian and believe Adventist teachings, then why is there more true Christians in Adventism than in any other false religion. Jeremy, once again, Adventism is not the true gospel. But here is what I am saying, Jeremy, Lynne, Dennis, and Colleen, Adventism as traditionally taught is false. However, God, in His mercy and grace, has seen fit to at least allow a great number of SDAs to somehow hear the true gospel within the framework of Adventism, and somehow have more true Christians in that false group, than any other false group--as admitted by Tim Oliver. For that I will rejoice! I am grateful He has saved my mother despite her beliefs that don't square with the Bible. Salvation is based solely on Christ's mercy and grace alone, and he chooses to save people out of every false movement there is. When people are saved out of CS, Mormonism, JW, Islam, Buddhism, the Holy Spirit convicts them right away that they are wrong and must leave that religion. I don't see quite the same situation with Adventism. I did leave immediately, and wrote my letter within a few months of being saved. But that was all of God, and none of me. Some people are not called out of Adventism immediately. That is why I am very careful not to say that all who stay in, including pastors who may be called to teach are necessarily dishonest. God may have a special purpose right now for Randy Roberts preaching his series on Galatians to the largest SDA church in North America. I am praying for him. I just have to be honest--when I hear Randy Roberts do a sermon, if I didn't know that it was the SDA church he was preaching from, that I cannot tell the differnce from any other evangelical church. Yes, that may be part of the deception, but, for now I am going to give Randy Roberts the benefit of the doubt. Stan | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1164 Registered: 10-2004  |
Stan, was it April 9's broadcast that you're referring to? Because I don't see it on there yet, but I will try to listen to it when it is put on there. But if you don't even think we should use the word cult to describe SDA or LDS or anyone--then I definitely object to you using it in any way to describe Chuck Smith.  I will see, though, about that teaching of Smith's you mention. I really doubt that he believes the Jews' claim that the disciples stole the (old) body away--so how does he deal with the empty tomb?! Stan, you wrote: "However, it seems that there is a tacit admission on his part, if he believes it is possible to be a Christian and believe Adventist teachings, then why is there more true Christians in Adventism than in any other false religion." Stan, I don't think that Tim Oliver believes that the Christians in SDAism believe the Adventist teachings--he seems to indicate on those audio files that the Christians are the ones who don't believe in the anti-gospel doctrines of the church. I would really encourage you to listen to those audio files. Stan, you wrote:
Didn't you see my post earlier where I mentioned/quoted that some former Christian Science members say that they were not called out of CS immediately? That's the same as with Adventism, Stan! Here are the quotes again:
Another person on that last link also says they became a Christian awhile before leaving CS. Stan, Randy Roberts is preaching in one of the most liberal areas/churches of SDAism. What he preaches has no bearing on my assessment of Adventism in general/as a whole. And even saying that, I have not listened to his sermons so I don't even know that he is preaching the pure gospel. And I thought Colleen hinted that he believes in some type of liberal universalist-type teaching? Maybe Colleen could clarify that. Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on April 10, 2006) | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 169 Registered: 7-2005 |
What do you think of Des Ford? He was really saved and remains dishonest? I believe that the church used him to promote deception. What about his integrity? What about God's plan for his life? For a long time he was an adventist. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3726 Registered: 12-2003 |
Jeremy, I don't think Randy Roberts is teaching universalism. What I sense more is a lack of clarity on what it means to be "in Christ" (a phrase I've heard him use a lot). He talks about grace and being in Christ and not returning to works, but there's really no clarity about what it means to accept Jesus: to repent and acknowledge one's deep depravity. His "grace talk" reminds me of the more "soft" gospel messages that come out the so-called "seeker friendly" movement. Colleen | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1516 Registered: 3-2005 |
Jeremy, Thanks for the CS quotes. I do admit that in those cases it was valid for those CS folks. But, I still wonder about the overall numbers. I simply do not believe it is possible for someone to believe CS theology, stay in it and be saved. However, I do believe it is possible to be saved as an Adventist, and stay in it and be saved. But, in order to be saved, you must be trusting solely in the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ, and you can't be trusting in Sabbath keeping, or anything else. It is possible Jeremy, that there have been a few Mormons etc. saved despite their theology, but to be saved you must believe that Jesus is who he said he is. And, I checked, the April 9 broadcast of my phone in is not up yet. Let me explain Jeremy about the cult of personality that Chuck Smith has built. This does not imply in any way that Calvary Chapel is a cult. It is orthodox evangelicalism with an unfortunate emphasis on free-will, and an inordinate pre-occupation with the evils of Calvinism. My wife and I attended Calvary Chapel for many years. I received great blessing from his teaching. I still believe he is a great man of God. But, over the years, after leaving Adventism, I started to see the same problems of the spirit of fundamentalism that I saw in Adventism. Also, I saw the looks in all the folks eyes who would sit on the floor, and keep their eyes transfixed on Chuck, and adored and idolized him. This was noticed not only by me, but other respected evangelical teachers in the area. Now, it is true, that most of what Chuck teaches is orthodox, and it didn't do any harm. But, neither would people really read their Bibles like the Bereans to see if these things be so that Chuck was teaching. The final straw when I felt I had to leave Calvary was when Chuck made that remark that the hurricane Katrina came just in time to see to it that a gay pride parade wouldn't happen. Most of the audience clapped, and I cringed, and my heart was grieved for so many innocent people who took Katrina's fury. As far as Randy Roberts Jeremy, I would love to give you a test sometime, and send you a tape to see if you received blessing from it and whether it was orthodox. I just happened to turn on the radio one morning and started listening to a sermon, and at the time I didn't know it was Randy. I said, my, is this radio station now replacing Adventism with good evangelical sermons? Well, guess what, much to my surprise, it was Randy Roberts. There was not one mention of the Sabbath or Ellen, or the IJ. It was strictly the preaching of Jesus Christ and Him crucified. I was personally blessed. You are right Jeremy, this is not representative teaching, but at the same time, if a casual listener had heard that SDA was some cult, and then heard this sermon, there would be an immediate disconnect. Jackob, I believe God raised up Des Ford to do a special work to bring light to a dark world of bondage and legalism. He was my greates early influence. It was Ford that showed me for the first time the glorious gospel of grace, and taught me that I no longer had anything to fear. There truly is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus. I don't believe that Ford is dishonest. He was no friend of historical Adventism, Jackob. Did you get a chance to read that Ford book that I sent you? If Des Ford had left Adventism immediately, or had given up the Sabbath, then his ministry would have no effectiveness. As a result of his staying in the church, thousands, if not millions, have had a chance to study his writings, and see that Adv | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1517 Registered: 3-2005 |
I almost lost my entire post above as the hospital's computer system was shutting down, but now is back up, but to finish my point on Ford, Tens of thousands have had a chance to study the writings of Ford, and to see that Adventism is built on a lie. It is built on the quicksand of 1844, and the sanctuary, and the demonic (so I am still not hesitant to use that word) doctrine of the Investigative doctrine. No doctrine is as evil as this to take away even from believers their joy of assurance of salvation. So, because Ford was so able to articulate well these doctrinal problems, then, his teaching was a perfect bridge out of Adventism. Adventism is built on a house of cards. If 1844 is false, then Ellen's authority is entirely gone. And since the vision of the sanctuary showed Jesus opening up the ark and pointing to the decalogue, and showing a halo around the fourth commandment, then obviously, Sabbatarinism, and the Old Covenant are gone. It is like playing dominoes--one doctrine or domino falls, and then they all fall down. I am disappointed that Des Ford has not seen it like many other SDAs have. But I believe Ford is still doing a great work down in Australia. But there is no doubt, that Des Ford loves the Lord, and is saved. Stan | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 653 Registered: 4-2000 |
Jackob, It was Dr. Desmond Ford that initially brought the Gospel to me as well. Des Ford has provided a meaningful "bridge" for many inquiring and transitioning Adventists. His case is alot like that of Martin Luther. Both of these men did not fully comprehend the total depth of deception in their former belief systems. Thus, they retained some incorrect views. However, I believe God mightily used both of them. In the case of Dr. Ford, God isn't finished with him yet. Let us continue to pray for him. Dennis Fischer | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 170 Registered: 7-2005 |
I think that the bottom line is the fact we were compelled to leave adventism. If a real christian can remain in the SDA church, rejecting the cultic teachings, rejecting Ellen White, and stating fully his position, the necessity of leaving the SDA church dissapears. It's no longer a MUST. And in this way, those who criticized the formers for leaving the church are right. I cannot sustain their position. For me it's hard to say that Des Ford was dishonest, but I realize that because the SDA church has many christians in his ranks just enforce the position of those who criticize the leaving of the church. Leaving a church only because it presents a false gospel is not a MUST. Paul the Apostle still clinged to the churches of Galatia which adopted a false gospel. I have a hard time believing that there exists only dishonest or disinformed adventists (I believe Des Ford was not disinformed, neither dishonest). But I cannot reject the position "Only disinformed or dishonest adventists", because in this way, the motivation for leaving the SDA church dissapears. If the MUST dissapears, we better stay with the SDA church like Paul with the churches of Galatia. But if the MUST remains, Des Ford was really a dishonest adventist. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3730 Registered: 12-2003 |
The problem here is that we are agan constructing a set of "rules" to govern what a person should do about their church affiliation when they discover the gospel. Whether or not a church is a cult has nothing at all to do with the people inside it. It has everything to do with the organization's loyalties and teachings and requirements. God is responsible for completing the work He begins in us (Phil 1:6), and as probably most if not all of us here know, God Himself orchestrated our own awakening and our realization of the need to leave the Adventist church. But God is completely sovereign; He can use and sustain and convict people in any time frame He wishes, and for His purposes which we generally can't see. Think of Josephóa God-fearing man. He knew His father's God, and no doubt he taught his sons about God. Yet Joseph married an Egyptian priest's daughter, and his two sons Ephraim and Mannaseh were born in Egypt and raised not only by Joseph but by their Egyptian motheróand they were undoubtedly more steeped in Egyptian culture, etc. than anything else. The Bible doesn't tell us how (or if) Joseph superimposed worship of the One True God over Egyptian religion in the training of his sons. But we know that Ephraim and Mannaseh became the fathers of two of Israel's twelve tribes. We can safely infer that God made sure they knew Him. As Dennis pointed out, God doesn't always show a reformer all the problems with the system He appoints him or her to expose. He begins with certain heresiesóusually, it seems, foundational onesóand brings awareness. Des Ford was, apparently, not convicted of the total depravity of Ellen, but without him we here would not be where we are today. And, as Dennis so aptly said, we can still pray for Des. All of us are works in progress. We must know that we are saying "yes" to God on a daily basis. If the time comes when we refuse to walk through the door He opens in front of us, we stunt our growth and limit our effectiveness in honoring Him. We can KNOW that a system is completely corrupt without making a "rule" that says all people must exit that system in the way we left. I do believe that God progressively reveals reality and truth, and we are accountable to Him for embracing what He reveals. But God does harden some, and others he keeps in certain amounts of "unknowing" for a time. I'm convinced that God uses everyone at whatever stage they're in for His purposes. For example, during the eight or so years Greg Taylor preached the gospel in the Adventist church, praying to know God's will and to discover the secret of vital spiritual growth, God used him in that system to bring the awarness of truth to his congregation. While in some ways Greg was, as he put it, "part of the problem" in creating a deceptive picture of Adventism, still from God's perspective, those years are redeemed. My experience is clarifying that God is no more in the business of creating post-Decalogue "rules" than He was in the business of enforcing the Ten to Christ-followers. What he requires is that we FOLLOW HIM when He beckons. We are to embrace the truth He shows us, and we are responsible for speaking that truth. But our responsibility ends this side of creating "rules" for how and when others move on. We can KNOWóand indeed, I believe God wants us to knowóthat Adventism is a false religion. He clearly took us out and has blessed us for it. He is dealing with those inside, and as Jeremy's post shows, this phenomenon is not limited to Adventism. As Jeremy also said, Adventism's "evangelical" front is part of the great deception. People in Adventism are not more free than people in any other unbiblical religion. They just appear more free to outsiders, and the doctrinal permissiveness of today's church allows people to be "all over the board" in terms of what they personally embrace. I really do believe Dale is right about the deceived or dishonest Adventists. Deception looks so much like the real thing that people can, I believe, discover the basic truth of the gospel and still not see how treacherous Adventism is all at once. I also believe that God will continue to reveal the implications of the gospel as time passes. As for people like Randy Robertsóhe is in God's hands. God works out "works out everything in conformity to the purpose of His will." Adventism IS a false gospel, and I believe it is a cult. But God is in the business of introducing people to Himself. If He uses a Randy Roberts or a Greg Taylor or a Rick Warren oir even a TD Jakes to awaken a spark of desire to know Jesus, God's will is being done. We can trust God, and we can trust those we care about to Him. We are asked not to run from truth and reality, but we are not asked to engineer others' exits from any cult. We are asked to be wtinesses of Jesus and to honor His name. He will take care of timing. Our job is to trust Him. Colleen | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3731 Registered: 12-2003 |
BTW, Jackob, just a word about the Galatian church and Paul. Paul was admonishing an already existing church that was becoming sidetracked by a false gospel. It was not a church FOUNDED in deception. They were true born-again believers who were being deceived. Paul had good reason to work with them in the context of their church. It's a different story to have a church FOUNDED in a false gospel and try to reform it into a true Christian church. As we've often said here, one really can't reform a cult. It needs to be abandoned and the people re-planted in truth. If they find Jesus while inside the false gospel, He will take charge of leading them into full freedom in His time. Colleen | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1521 Registered: 3-2005 |
Colleen, The only person in that list above who doesn't preach the real Jesus is TD Jakes. Without a correct view of the Trinity, and by denying the doctrine of the trinity, Jakes is no better than a JW. But, otherwise, I agree with you about leaving on God's timing. Stan | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 2442 Registered: 3-2004  |
When I read of the Christians like Luther, Des Ford and others, I am reminded that they did not say God inspired them through a vision. God may not have shown them everything and only God knows why He did not. I am just glad that there are men like Luther and Ford who loved/love God and wrote what they did. Diana | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1165 Registered: 10-2004 |
Stan, You wrote:
You've just admitted what I've been saying all along, Stan. Just as a Mormon or CS must disbelieve certain LDS or CS doctrine to be saved, an SDA must also disbelieve SDA doctrine (such as trusting in their works). And just as a CS or LDS member has to believe in the real Jesus, so also an SDA has to believe in the real Jesus. And that only happens by a miracle of God. Regarding Des Ford: I am not saying that God has not used him mightily or that he is not saved, but he is still totally an Adventist, believes that Ellen G. White is a true prophet of God, that the Sabbath will be a final test, etc. I do not understand how he can believe that EGW is a true prophet if one of her main doctrines (1844/IJ) is false! Doesn't he see that she taught a false gospel? How can she then be a true prophet? Anyway, I do remember that the last part of his article in Proclamation disturbed me--he was saying that we have to maintain our salvation. Since he still believes in EGW, I'm sure he is still influenced by her. Also, when he talked about "faith that works," it sounded like the terminology Adventists like to use. Although I'm sure he did not mean it the way most SDAs do, I thought that he probably shouldn't have used the same terminology that they like to use--and that they might just say, "That's what I believe, too!" Stan, the audio is now up at Living By The Word. I listened to the conversation and it did not sound to me like Craig Hawkins necessarily had any evidence of Chuck Smith's teaching about Christ's resurrection, just the resurrection of believers. As I posted above, even when Ellen White said that we get completely new bodies, even she did not say that Christ's body was a completely new body. I also used to believe that we got completely new bodies, but even when I believed that I did not believe that it was that way with Christ! In the sermons, etc., that I saw at http://www.blueletterbible.org/, I could only find Smith teaching that view of the resurrection for believers, not necessarily for Christ. He makes it clear that the tomb was empty, that the grave clothes were empty, and that Jesus still bore the marks of the crucifixion. The idea of the resurrection of believers being with the same body is something relatively new to me and something I still struggle with, having been raised believing something different. I do see the problem with believing that we are raised with a totally different body, but I wonder about 2 Corinthians 5 where it says that the new body is "from heaven"--how can it be from heaven if it's the same body? But I don't think any of us should accuse Chuck Smith of teaching that Christ rose in a totally different body, unless we have a statement from Chuck where he actually teaches that. Jeremy | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1522 Registered: 3-2005 |
Jeremy, Are you sure you listened to the whole conversation? I will have to listen to see if all the conversation got on the download. It is possible, that due to the very controversial nature of what Craig was announcing to the large KKLA audience, and to the world on the internet, that even the producers decided this was too hot of a topic to post. Wow, jeremy, thanks for the heads up--you may be on to something, but, believe me I will get the documentation. Because, if Craig Hawkins is wrong, then he needs to be called to account. I have been listening to Hawkins for 20 years, and know him to be a man of utmost integrity. Now, regarding Des Ford, Jeremy. I have heard Ford say on numerous occasions, including on the Bible Answer Man show with Walter Martin, that the Sabbath IS NOT a test for salvation. Can you find documentation that Ford says that the Sabbath is a test for salvation? As Colleen said, if it were not for Des Ford, most of us would not be posting on this forum. He was a true Reformer. I think also, there is a sense in which we need to show respect and give the benefit of the doubt to those who have gone before us in pioneering the trails that have helped us so much. Des Ford believes that our salvation is built on nothing less than Jesus' blood and righteousness. Also, I have a great deal of respect for Dale Ratzlaff. He took the direct vitriolic hits of the enemy head-on. He has seen what the worst of Adventism can do. He even put himself at financial risk, and risked everything for the kingdom of God. But I am a little puzzled, that when I posted his views that Adventism, while cultic, doesn't quite rise to the level of other cults, and now I have come to agree with him, then there seems to be an inordinate outrage. Maybe I am misinterpreting you, Jeremy, and we really agree on the basic issues. I just feel the need to be absolutely semantically correct. There is no way that Adventism rises to the level of Christian Science. Sorry, if my statements offend, but that is where I stand. Stan | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1166 Registered: 10-2004 |
Stan, The following is from an interview with Ford by Adventist Today from 1999 that is on Ford's web site (http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org/library/atodayinterview/part2.cfm):
Stan, you wrote: "I just feel the need to be absolutely semantically correct. There is no way that Adventism rises to the level of Christian Science." Let me ask you a question, Stan. In your opinion, does Mormonism rise to the level of Christian Science? Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on April 11, 2006) | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1167 Registered: 10-2004 |
Stan, I just found this from a sermon by SDA Pastor J. David Newman:
Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on April 11, 2006) | ||
| Lynne Registered user Username: Lynne Post Number: 336 Registered: 10-2005 |
I'm sorry Stan, but from my own experience, I must say that Adventism is a cult. Every Adventist knows about the Mark of the Beast, Sunday Worship, End Times being now, the others (Christians) being simple, persecuting, etc. Tell me what is not cult like about the Seventh-day Adventist church. Why was I taught that other Christians are against me, they are enemies if they are brought into the truth and reject it, the Sunday worshipers, Mark of the Beast. Leave the church and receive the mark. You must stay Adventist for salvation, you know the truth now! I've been programmed to think like this for so many years. Yes, I know now I was brainwashed and this is a difficult mindset to get out of. It is insanity! It is more than cultish. It is a cult! Please tell me what in this definition doesn't compare to Adventism. I took a little of this from a Former Jehovah Witness website: http://www.xjw.com/whatcult.html Some basic principles of Social Psychology and Group Dynamics: The net result of these studies has been the consistent demonstration of the remarkable power of behavior modification techniques, group conformity, and obedience to authority. These three factors are known in psychological terms as the "influence process." In totalistic cults, the ideology is internalized as "the truth," the only "map" or reality. The doctrine not only serves to filter incoming information but also regulates how the information can be thought about. . . The doctrine claims to answer all questions to all problems and situations. Another key aspect of thought control involves training members to block out any information which is critical of the group. If information transmitted to a cult member is perceived as an attack on either the leader, the doctrine, or the group, a hostile wall goes up. Members are trained to disbelieve any criticism. Critical words have been explained away in advance as "the lies about us that Satan puts in peoples' minds" . . . Paradoxically, criticism of the group confirms that the cult's view of the world is correct. The information presented does not register properly. The most powerful technique for emotional control is phobia indoctrination . . . People are made to have a panic reaction at the thought of leaving, . When cult leaders tell the public "Members are free to leave any time they want; the door is open," they give the impression that members have free will and are simply choosing to stay. Actually, members may not have a real choice, because they have been indoctrinated to have a phobia of the outside world. Induced phobias eliminate the psychological possibility of a person choosing to leave the group merely because he is unhappy or wants to do something else. Destructive organizations also control information by having many levels of "truth." Cult ideologies have "outsider" doctrines and "insider" doctrines. The outsider material is relatively bland stuff for the general public or fresh converts. The inner doctrines are unveiled only gradually as a person gets in deeper. ______________________________________________________________ I can go all over the place on the internet and find defintions of cults that describe the Seventh-day Adventist church and my experience therein. Evangelical Christianity would list the following as orthodox doctrine: 1. The Authority, Infallibility, and Inerrancy of the Bible 2. The Tri-Unity of God 3. The Virgin Birth of Christ 4. The Deity of Christ 5. The All-Sufficiency of Christ's atoning sacrifice for sin 6. The physical and miraculous Resurrection of Christ 7. The necessity of Salvation by Faith alone 8. The future physical return of Christ to earth 9. The Eternal conscious bliss of the saved 10. The Eternal conscious punishment of the unsaved The Seventh-day Adventist church includes commas, semicolons and eliminates some of the above 10 items. Because those words are in their doctrine, though garbled or overexplained, doesn't give the doctrine the same meaning as Evangelical Christianity making them unorthodox. Deviation from the above is not considered Evangelical Christianity. |
